The Fragments of Sophocles, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

CAMBRIDGE LIBRARY COLLECTION Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...

Author: Richard Claverhouse Jebb (editor) | W. G. Headlam (editor) | A. C. Pearson (editor)

151 downloads 1539 Views 7MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

CAMBRIDGE LIBRARY COLLECTION Books of enduring scholarly value

Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century, Latin and Greek were compulsory subjects in almost all European universities, and most early modern scholars published their research and conducted international correspondence in Latin. Latin had continued in use in Western Europe long after the fall of the Roman empire as the lingua franca of the educated classes and of law, diplomacy, religion and university teaching. The flight of Greek scholars to the West after the fall of Constantinople in 1453 gave impetus to the study of ancient Greek literature and the Greek New Testament. Eventually, just as nineteenth-century reforms of university curricula were beginning to erode this ascendancy, developments in textual criticism and linguistic analysis, and new ways of studying ancient societies, especially archaeology, led to renewed enthusiasm for the Classics. This collection offers works of criticism, interpretation and synthesis by the outstanding scholars of the nineteenth century.

The Fragments of Sophocles Sir Richard Jebb (1841–1905) was the most distinguished classicist of his generation, a Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, and University Orator, subsequently Professor of Greek at Glasgow University and finally Regius Professor of Greek at Cambridge, and a Member of Parliament for the University. At his death, his planned volumes of the fragments of Sophocles, which would complete his edition of the complete plays and fragments, were not ready for publication, and the final editing of these three volumes was undertaken by W.G. Headlam and A.C. Pearson; the books were published in 1917. The first volume contains a general introduction; Volumes 1 and 2 present the text of the fragments and a commentary, and the final volume consists of addenda and corrigenda, spurious fragments and two indices. The plays are presented in Greek alphabetical order: Volume 2 contains fragments of plays from ‘Ion’ to ‘Chryses’.

Cambridge University Press has long been a pioneer in the reissuing of out-of-print titles from its own backlist, producing digital reprints of books that are still sought after by scholars and students but could not be reprinted economically using traditional technology. The Cambridge Library Collection extends this activity to a wider range of books which are still of importance to researchers and professionals, either for the source material they contain, or as landmarks in the history of their academic discipline. Drawing from the world-renowned collections in the Cambridge University Library, and guided by the advice of experts in each subject area, Cambridge University Press is using state-of-the-art scanning machines in its own Printing House to capture the content of each book selected for inclusion. The files are processed to give a consistently clear, crisp image, and the books finished to the high quality standard for which the Press is recognised around the world. The latest print-on-demand technology ensures that the books will remain available indefinitely, and that orders for single or multiple copies can quickly be supplied. The Cambridge Library Collection will bring back to life books of enduring scholarly value (including out-of-copyright works originally issued by other publishers) across a wide range of disciplines in the humanities and social sciences and in science and technology.

The Fragments of Sophocles Volum e 2 E d i t e d b y R i c ha rd C l av e rh o u se Je b b, W.G. Headl a m and A.C. P earson

C A M B R I D G E U N I V E R SI T Y P R E S S Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paolo, Delhi, Dubai, Tokyo Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781108009874 © in this compilation Cambridge University Press 2009 This edition first published 1917 This digitally printed version 2009 ISBN 978-1-108-00987-4 Paperback This book reproduces the text of the original edition. The content and language reflect the beliefs, practices and terminology of their time, and have not been updated. Cambridge University Press wishes to make clear that the book, unless originally published by Cambridge, is not being republished by, in association or collaboration with, or with the endorsement or approval of, the original publisher or its successors in title.

THE

FRAGMENTS OF

SOPHOCLES EDITED WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES FROM THE PAPERS OF SIR R. C. JEBB AND DR W. G. HEADLAM

BY

A. C. PEARSON, M.A. FORMERLY SCHOLAR OF CHRIST'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE

VOLUME II

Cambridge : at the University Press 1917

CONTENTS OF VOLUME II PAOES

FRAGMENTS OF NAMED PLAYS :

Introductions, text and notes

.

.

i—330

IQN

For the title see p. 23. 319 avSpbs icrOXov Travra yevvaicos 3 1 9 Orion flor. 7. TO p. 51, 29 2o'Sophoclem imitatus videtur Menander: tpoK\4ovsvIbjvos. 'irpbs...(pe'peiv.' Kal rd7a#a rai ra KUKO. 5eX nraiovTa (1. fxijGOLVTO.) yevvaius (p^peiv Com. 4 p. 264 Nauck favours F. W. Schmidt's proposal to write e'aSXov irpbs dvdpbs, and [fr. 672, III 195 K.]. dvSpbs rd irpocnrlTTTOVTCL yevvalais (ptpeiv Com. 4. p. 293 quotes in its support Choricius Gaz. p. 17 etrBXov yap dvSpds, i] Tpayipdia QTJITLV,[fr. 771, III 215 K. = Men. mon. 13]. airavra raXus.Emphasis certainly Menandri vestigia legerunt multi: XPV seems to require that order : cf. Ai. 1071 yap rd av/j-wiirToi'Ta yevvaiws (pipeiv Nicetas Eugen. 9, 142. rd 5^ av^aiKCUTO! KaKoD irpbs dvdpbs dvSpa STuxbrTjv \ fLT)$kv BiKaiovv KT£. Eur.fr. 28. SchmidtVOVTO. dv5piyevvalws 5et0^peiv Vita Aesofii, p. 46, 10. ra irp0(nriivT0vra...yevvalii3S adds a long list of examples. But the (fitpovres Dicaearchus q. d. Descr. Graeciae reverse order is natural and correct in fr. 30 in Muelleri Geogr. min. I. p. 105. 79, where see n. for npSs c. gen. in this yevvalws (p^povres rd TrpoairiirrovTa HijDsense. The sentiment is adapted from parch. Stob. Jlor. 108, 81 p. 391 [lv the current proverbial philosophy: cf. Theogn. 657 fir]dev ayav xaXewfH&tv dew p. 982, I, Hense]. fiSeirjv yevvatus 4peiv schol. B //. fi 49. (pipeiv TO. rbv ttiyevri. Antiphan. fr. 28r, II 125 K. rd Tvxqs (pipeai Set yv-quiois TOV eiyevTJ. (rvfifiaivovTa yevvalws €XPVV (fort. 7i
320 iv A105 K7]TTOLS apoxxrOai [IOVOV evSaljjLovas 6\f3ov<s 320.

1 xd-jroLS coni. M. Schmidt

32O Stob.yfor. 103. 10 (= IV p. 904, 'iv... 6 Hense) 2o<poic\4ovs "Iwcos. oXjSous.' There does not appear to be any necessity for changing the text. CerP. II.

2 fiovnov A

tainly there is no probability in such wild conjectures as Heimsoeth's 4r Aios KYITTOIS dpovai ixovvov dvdpes 6\(3toi, and Week lein's iv Atos /cdTrots Spe'ireo'dat. fiovvov dvSpbs oXfltov, or in R. Ellis's dpourai

IOOKAEOYI iHoSvov eiSainuv Xo/36s, which Campbell ISovaav Si TT)v"Hpav $avfid irapd rtp "ArXavrt. spaced words serve to illustrate the fojTrowi < yap &TT' >• dpieov irarpit iv KIJJTOIS Upbv xop0" tcrare n s dyka'C^eTU, b yap apLUTOs 6\§wv. Nti/jufiais). This was by some authorities Similarly Eur. fr. 137 rwv ydp TT\O6TOJV placed in the extreme north (see on fr. 08' npt-GTOS I yewaXov \exos eipeiv. T h e 956), but most commonly in the west metre is ionic: beyond the stream of Oceanus. Here were grown the golden apples which Ge presented to Hera on the occasion of her marriage with Zeus : Pherecyd. I.e. For the introduction of feet with an (Eratosth. catast. 3) ire iya/j.elro 17 "Rpa. irrational long syllable see Aesch. Suppl. fnrb A«5S, (pepbvTwv airy TOIV Beiiv S&pa, 1032, 1040, Ar. Kan. 328, Thesm. 117 f. TTJV TTJV iX9e?v tpipovtrav ret xpi/trea fj.r)Xa'

321

/SovcrraSas auXas < 321. 321

1

Hesych. iv

. : (ceiVecos cod. p.

283

oi et

2O0OKX?7S Ion. Keifievos p-iv f ai\as tni xipaov ^ 5ia Xf'pwi/ txei rj oBrws (&7rX<2s conj. Blaydes) iiifiareiei. The name of the play was read by Musurus as "Iwci, and M. Schmidt suggested Sfeowt; but Dindorf's view that OLvet was intended by the corrector deserves consideration (see Nauck on Eur. fr. 407). 1 xti|ivos. In the winter season the herds graze in the home meadows or shelter in the byres, but in the summer they are driven away to range over the hills. H. defends his brilliant emendation by quoting 0. T. 1138 (the shepherd brings his flocks down from the mountains in September) x e ' M <3 " a Is'tforirdfia T' els ^7rauX' ^ya> j ijXavvov ovrbs r' ^s TB Aaiov arad/Jid. Dion Chrys. 7. 13 r6re u.ev 5?; i% avdyKys avrov KaTe/j.elvaix.ev, ovirep erixof-ev rhs [Sods ixovTes KO.1 ricas (najvas ireiron]iJ.ivoi Kai av\riv did ZtiXwv oi /ieydXr/v ovde hx"P^v, /ib
2 %epaeiei add. Dindorf

av oiu.0.1 irpbs avrb TTOV TO dtpos. TOV ixev yb.p x«/*wi'os ev rots xedlois ive/jiofiei', vofi.T]f inavty e'xwres /cat TTOXOV x*-Xbv ctiroKel/j.evov TOV Si Otpovs dirrjKativoiAev eh T&, opv2 \(po-iia. The text of Hesychius is corrupt or defective, but it seems certain that xe/xret/ei must have been used by Sophocles in the passage cited. I agree therefore with Dindorf in thinking that it dropped out after aiXds, but not in assuming the loss of other words as well. xe/3're^e"' is a rare word, but the sense in which Sophocles was most likely to employ it is 'to be on dry land': so Eur. fr. 636, 3 rbv iratSa xepo-eieiv fibpos (Dobree's correction seems certain). Plut. soil. an. 33 p. 982 B eirifjcifctc Se fir) Swa/Afroi /j.tjSi xe/Derei)eu\ The ace. aiXds would then resemble Phil. 144 Tbvov...ovnva Keirtu, Eur. Suppl. 987 rl WOT' aWepiav'io-rqKewiTpav; and other instances quoted by Kuehner-Gerth 1 314. Since, however, Philostr. iun.

IQN—KAMIKOI € ff

imag. 1 1 TO KTJTOS UJS x P *vi> ?%ei is 'to come to land,' we must not exclude due to the fact that %ip
322 322 Xdas.

Hesych. 1 p. 220 d|eVToire- rpa1 2O
The name of the play was conjectured to be Sfowiu by Musurus, and "Iwei by Schow, whom Nauck follows. M. Schmidt urges that the position of the accent points to Olviivrj: but that title is

otherwise unknown, although it might have covered a reference to the 'AX&faxgpos. Dindorf agreed with Musurus. The word occurs again in O.C. 19. The gender of the gloss perhaps indicates that the substantive to be supplied is

KAMIKOI Herodotus (7. 169, 170) refers to the story of the violent death of Minos at Camicus when he went to Sicily in his search for Daedalus, but gives no details. For these we have to go to other authorities. After the death of his son Icarus, Daedalus continued his flight and arrived safely at Camicus, where he was received by the Sicanian king Cocalus, and soon became a welcome inmate of his household. Meanwhile Minos pursued him relentlessly, and in every place to which he came produced a spiral shell, promising a large reward to anyone who should succeed in threading it; for he thought that in this way he would discover Daedalus. When he showed the shell to Cocalus, in whose palace Daedalus was concealed, the king undertook to perform the task and afterwards gave the shell to Daedalus. Daedalus bored a hole in the shell, and fastening a thread to an ant waited until the ant had passed from one end to the other. Minos, finding his puzzle solved, felt sure that no one but Daedalus possessed the necessary cunning, and at once demanded his surrender. Cocalus promised to comply with his wishes, and offered him the usual hospitalities of the age. Daedalus, however, had so endeared himself to the king's daughters by his artistic skill that they determined to prevent the surrender

4

10<J>0KAE0Y2

of their favourite to his enemy, and contrived the death of Minos by pouring boiling pitch over him when they attended him in the bath. Such is the version of Zenob. 4. 92 {Paroem. I 112), which is practically identical with Apollod. epit. 1. 13—15> with the exception that Apollodorus mentions another account substituting boiling water for the pitch. The latter alternative, as we learn from schol. Horn. B 145, was derived from Philostephanus (FHG III 31) and Callimachus in the AtVta (fr. 5 Sch.), and through Callimachus no doubt passed to Ovid (Id. 290). An additional detail is mentioned by schol. Pind. Nem. 4. 95 (59), where Daedalus is said to have invented a contrivance for carrying the water through a pipe in the roof so as to fall on Minos's head. The agency of the daughters, but without any detailed explanation of their treachery, is recorded also by Hygin. fab. 44, Conon 25, Pausan. 7. 4. 61, and schol. Pind. Pyth. 6. 5. Diodorus, who as usual converts the myth into a semblance of history, makes Daedalus the engineer of Cocalus, who constructs for him an impregnable fortress. Minos then invades Sicily, but Cocalus entraps him by proposing a friendly conference, and then suffocates him with the steam of the bathroom (4. 78, 79). But long before his time Cocalus and the invasion of Minos had become a part of the stock-in-trade of the historians as an indispensable element in the narrative of the Greek colonization of Sicily: see Philistus fr. 1 (FHG I 185), Arist.poL 2. 10. I27i b 39, Strabo 273, 279, Diod. 12. 71, Heraclid. Pont. 29 (FHG II 220). Fr. 324 leaves no doubt that the story of Sophocles was the same as that which is preserved in Apollodorus. Wagner (Epit. Vat. p. 132) inferred that Apollodorus derived his material from the v-rtoQeai'i of Sophocles' play2, and the conclusion would be much more convincing than it is, if there were better reasons than those given by Nauck for assigning fr. 325 to Sophocles. But whether boiling pitch or some other instrument was employed by the daughters in compassing the destruction of Minos matters little; in other respects, the main features of the plot are securely fixed by the general agreement of the authorities. The play was possibly known also by the alternative title Minos, to which there is a solitary reference by Clement of Alexandria (fr. 407). The usual title, wrongly altered to KafiUioi, by Brunck, indicates that the chorus consisted of citizens of Camicus, one of the few places in Sicily which are definitely known as Sicanian settlements. The site is usually located in the neighbourhood of Agrigentum between that town and Minoa, 1 2

Inycus is mentioned in place of Camicus: but see 10. 17. 4. He is followed by Robert in Pauly-Wissowa IV 2001.

KAMIKOI

5

but, according to more recent researches, it was further to the north, among the mountains which rise inland above the baths of Selinus1. The story was exploited by the Dorians of Crete as a justification for their colonizing movement, in the course of which they occupied the south coast of Sicily, and it may therefore be dated at least as early, as the foundation of Gela in 2689. Recently, however, an attempt has been made by Bethe to show that the story of the tragic death of Minos at Camicus contains a substratum of historical truth, representing the emigration to Sicily of fragments of the Kefti people from Crete, which may be assumed to have taken place about 1200 B.C. The legend is confirmed by the archaeological discoveries of Minoan pottery in Sicily, and by the names Daidalion and Minoa given to pre-Hellenic settlements. 323 opvtdos

£v

rjkd' iTrc!)vv}jLo<; 'Adrjvatwv d

fearing to be put in the shade threw him over the cliffs of the Acropolis. According to Apollodorus (3. 214) and others, Perdix was the sister of Daedalus, who hanged herself in grief for her son's death (Phot. Suid. I.e.). Other authorities (Ov. Met. 8. 255, Hygin. fab. 39, •244. 274, Serv. on Verg. Georg. 1. 143, Aen. 6. 14, schol. Ov. Ib. 498) agree with Sophocles in giving the name Perdix to the nephew himself. It is not clear whether IT^p5t/cos Up6v and T&QOS Td\u> de ev KaM'/cots (KU/MKOIS codd.: Porson (Lucian Pise. 42) were one and the same spot, but the account of Pausanias shows wished to make the same correction in schol. Ant. 328) TOV virb AatddXou avaipe- that the grave of Talos was, as we should expect, close to the foot of the Acropolis. divTa Hep5iKa elvai Toivoixa. Robert in Pauly-Wissowa IV 1997 finds Daedalus, according to one of the it difficult to understand how Sophocles stories told in connexion with him, was was able to ignore the tradition attaching an Athenian who was obliged to go into to the grave of Talos, or to re-christen exile, having been condemned for homithe site; and similar doubts are expressed cide by the council of the Areopagus. by Gruppe in Bursian's_/a^r^/;. c x x x v n This was his reason for seeking the court 619, criticizing Holland's attempt (Die of Minos. The murder was committed thus: his sister's son Talos (Ilellaniciis Sage von Daidalos, Leipzig 1902) to show that Calos rather than Talos was the [FHG I 56] ap. schol. Eur. Or. 1648, name known to the version of the legend al.), or Calos (Pausan. 1. 21. 4. al.), adopted by Hellanicus. The evidence is was his rival in ingenuity, and had ininsufficient for the solution of such probvented the saw by observation of a snake's lems ; but it is possible that contradictory jawbone; Daedalus was jealous, and 323 Athen. 388 F rod 5e ovofiaros {sc. 7rep5i£) avruiv <-VIOL (TVfTTeWovcn rr\v fUtr-qv avXKafify...iro\i 5e eirri TO (KTUVOfxevov irapaTOis 'ATTIKOZS. 2O0OKX?}S Ka/xt/cots ' &pvi8os...7rdyoi.s.' Phot. lex. p . 413, 11 ( = Suid. s.v.), HepBiKos Upbv irapa TT) CLKpoiroXet. EuiraXafiif) yap eytvovTO Tcudes Aat'SaXos /cat II^/>5(£, ^s iuo? KaXos (KaXcis Suid.), u (pffovrj&as 6 AaiSaXot T?)$ TexvT)S tppiTpev avTbv /caret TTJS d/cpo7r6Xews' e 0 ' (^ i] Tlepdll; cavTTjV av-qpr-qaev' 'ASiypatot 5^ O.VTT)V iTlfi-qtyav. 2o(poK\ijs

1 2

Freeman, Sicily, 1 112. Rhein. Mus. LXV (1910) 200—232.

ZO^OKAEOYZ stories were connected with the two sanctuaries, and were already current in Sophocles' time. We cannot even safely assert that in Sophocles the invention of the saw was suggested to Perdix by the backbone of a fish, as Holland infers from the accounts of Ovid and the others whom he supposes to derive from Sophocles; for the incident formed no part of the action of the play, and probably only received a brief mention in the course of a narrative speech. Welcker (p. 433) plausibly suggests that Minos recalled to Daedalus the help he had received in his earlier trouble.

1 f. Holland's proposal to read iiriiW/J.OV, with KTavdiv following the quotation and qualified by 4v...ir 8' iwuivvfios (yv Blaydes).—For K\CIVOU 'kdyvaluv Nauck conj. /cXetvoi
324 dXias a-rpa^rfKov rrjaSe, TIKVOV, €L TLVO. S C d ' evpelv, < os Sieipeiev \ivov > 324.

2 5s Stelpetev \lvov supplevit Nauck

3 2 4 Athen. 86 D TUV that the last sentence runs: 8 5£ Xoucrafj.vi]fj.ove6ei /cat 2o0o/cX^s iv f fievos (XowS/ieyos conj. Nauck) biro TUV OVTWS 'a\ias...evpeiv.' KwKaXou BvyaT^ptav dprip^dtj ^ovaav TTIGThe allusion to the shell-fish called aav inxeap:4vav airy. Even before the (TTpd^tiKos is made clear by the narrative discovery of the epitome it had been inof Apollod. epit. 1. 14 AaiSaKov cie ferred by Robert (de Apollod. bibl. p. 49) e8iwKe M.tvb)s /fat Kad' eKdffTTjv x&pav that Zenobius copied his account from ipevvwp iicifufc ndx^ov, KOX irokvv iirqyApollodorus, and Wagner (Rh. Mus. y^Wero 8ihaHV fjucr&bv T<£ 5ta rod Kox^tov XLI 142) holds that in the last sentence \lvov Sielpavri (Sidp^avn cod., 8iel%avTi the original text of Apollodorus must Zenob.: corr. Valckenaer), Sia roirov have been: 8 be \ovKa\ov, Trap' afjbtvuv airifi' us 8e Imol <paaiv, £e. See In8 8e \a§iiv iirriYyiXheTO Sieipecv (8ielp!-eii> troductory Note and on fr. 325.—os cod., St^pletf Zenob.: corr. Valckenaer) SicCpcuv XCvov was supplied by Nauck /cat AatSaX^i Sl8w JueTijXXafo'. to Theseus to guide him on his return The whole of this is repeated by Zenob. from the labyrinth. 4. 92, with insignificant variations except

KAMIKOI 325 3 2 5 I admit this fragment for the from being able to prove that he used sake of convenience, in view of the curthe phrase wLa(roKdjp7]Tov fidpov in this rency which it has obtained from its connexion or at all. It is worth reinclusion in Nauck's edition; but the marking that Minos was a familiar figure case which he makes out in urging its on the Attic stage, and that he was held ascription to Sophocles is extremely weak. up to scorn as a typical oppressor : see Hesych. II p. 564 Kwpijaai (KUI/CIO'CU cod.) Pint. Thes. 16 Kal yap 6 Jilivws del SterAet •nircroKoirrjffcu (Salmasius conj. TnatTOKWKUKUS aKotiup Kal Xoidopoti/iepos iv TOIS vriaai, Nauck irluarj naraxfiaai) KO\ 'ATTIKOIS dcdrpots, to which Nauck adds K{IK\I£ TrepLcveyKeiv. KOLI iriGaoK&vqTovLiban. III 64 o&x opare rbv M/PO> deiva lib pop \£yovi;s, as Bergk conjectured]. siderations, it is doubtful whether the Nauck argues that IT. /I. in Hesych. must words TnaaoKihvrjTov p.6pov are suitable to be held to refer to Sophocles, on the the circumstances of Minos's death. Our ground that it is an apt description of only evidence affirms that after his bath, the fate of Minos according to the account or while he was bathing, the daughters given by Zenob. 4. 92 (quoted on fr. 324). of Cocalus poured boiling pitch over him. Wagner, Epit. Vat. p. 132, uses this ivwaoKwvriToi fidpos, however, like -nusai]fragment—as if its authority were estab- pi;s (Nauck for Tn.aai\pav) /xopos in the lished—in support of his conclusion that oracle quoted by Heraclides Ponticus ap. the passage in the epitome was derived Athen. 524 B, is credibly explained as by Apollodorus from the Argument to referring to a mode of executioa in Sophocles' play : see Introductory Note. which the victim is tarred all over and But this is to argue in a vicious circle: then set on fire. This kind of punishand, even though it may be probable that ment, which is not seldom mentioned, is Sophocles adopted the version which the same as the tunica molesla of Juv. 8. made boiling pitch the instrument of 235 (Mayor): cf. Plat. Gorg. 475 c, Lucr. Minos's death, we are still very far 3. 1017, Plant. Capt. 596.

326 rrjv < 8' >

OVTLS

rj$€Lv 326

4K

deov

5' add. H.

3 2 6 Etym. Flor. p. 143 -ijSeMrda regular form before a vowel of the third awb rov e(&eu> yiperac /car''{KTUGIP-fjSeu/person sing, of the plup. of olda: see Kai TO T (TO TP'ITOP conj. Nauck) ofiolois. Rutherford, N.P. p. 229ff.—e<6«>« does 2O0OKX?)S Ka/xiKOis (KWjutKois cod., Ka/ii- not necessarily imply direct intervention ('hidden by the god'), but is equivalent Kiois M i l l e r ) 'TTJV...K€Kpvp.fj^PT}V,' &VTI TOV to divinitus, Bebdev, ' by divine decree.' r/SefP. The phrase is fully illustrated by HeadIt is more likely that 8' has accidentally been dropped than that TTJV is relative. lam, On editing Aesch. p. 106: add Eur. Phoen. 1763 T&S ykp in 8eup apdyicas —One might suspect that rfyi refers to the (TTp&prfKos of fr. 324.—rjSeiv is the $P7]TOP b'pTa Set 0^)efv. Soph. fr. 314, 360.

IOOKAEOYI 327

iv $opa 3 2 7 fi' dKiaxfiovffii/ M. Schmidt: yii Kwxevovnv Ivcpopal dtfias anecd. Par.: corr. Dindorf 327 xovai,

Hesych. 11 p. 566 K /Aereojpifrovai..

x

2o0o-

irioroi

p

Cramer, anecd. Paris. IV p . 52, 19 nwxtiovaiv dxoiiffi, ixereoipliovai.. 2o0o/cX?js KU>ji«/cots' TKTTOL fie Ko>x€l*'ov(ni' frtpopai 5e//as. Etym. Gud. p . 360, 5 Ku>xeiov
cod. | ifj.<popai.$£<TiMs H e s y c h . ,

its derivative verb dvoKiax^iv, which is found in El. 732 (dvatctaxefei MSS), are constantly corrupted to OMO,KU>X<\ and avaKuixeieiv (Cobet, N. L. p. 169). All these forms go back ultimately to the Ionic perfect of ?xu> *'•*• OKOixa: f° r Cobet has shown conclusively that <xvvoKaxire should be read for OVVOXUKOTC in Horn. B218 (Misc. Crit. p. 304).—|i'... Sc|xas, a simple instance of trx^A"1 'I*""KOV. Wilamowitz on Her. 162. Cf. Phil.

Holland wished to substitute tnarai to agree with irripvyes, but though wings are undoubtedly meant, it is possible 1301 fidffes Me irp&s Seuiv xe?Pa> a n ( i s e e o n that some masculine noun served to Eur. Hclid. 63, 172.—In place of Iv describe them. <j>opa Ruhnken preferred afi<popei, which oKw)(eijowiv is a certain correction for Kia%tiovcnv, a form which cannot be sup- he justified by reference to Hesych. 1 ported. For 6KOIXC<JW there is the positive p. 166 &nopei' 0oprf<£> (i.e. according to Ruhnken, a/upopei' T£ (popeiifi). But the statement of Hesych. Ill p. 194, who use of the preposition is characteristic of glosses it by lxelvi avuixew; and analogy Sophocles: Phil. 60 ol
KHAAAIQN ZATYPIKOI The story which appears to have been the central incident of the play was related by Hesiod1 (see EGF p. 89). Orion, whose mother was Euryale the daughter of Minos, had received from his father Poseidon the power of walking on the waves. He came to Chios where Oenopion, the son of Dionysus, put his eyes out in revenge for a drunken insult offered to his daughter Merope. The blinded outcast wandered to Lemnos, where Hephaestus in pity gave him Cedalion, one of his servants, for a guide. Taking Cedalion on his shoulders to direct his course, he proceeded towards the rising sun, and so soon as he met the sun-god recovered his sight. Such is the story told by Eratosth. catast. 32, schol. Nic. Ther. 15, Hygin. poet. astr. 2. 34, schol. Arat. 322, together with further details about the fate of Orion, which do not concern the present play. Apollod. 1. 25 varies the account by stating that Orion came to the workshop of Hephaestus and seized one of his slaves to act as guide. Servius 1 Kinkel and Rzach (fr. 17) include the extract in question among the fragments of the poem Astronomia: but see Wilamowitz GGN 1895, p. 232. The last-named scholar holds that Cedalion was originally a dwarf (SdKTvXos: see on fr. 366).

KAMIKOI—KHAAAIQN

9

on Verg. Aen. 10. 763 adds important details: (1) that Dionysus and the satyrs assisted Oenopion to blind Orion; (2) that Orion consulted the oracle and was told that he would recover his eyesight,1 if he walked with his eyes continually turned towards the east . It will be observed that Vergil makes Orion so huge that he can walk through the sea, and yet keep head and shoulders above the waves {cum pedes incedit medii per maxuma Nerei \ stagna viam sciiidens, umero superemiriet undas). Lucian (de domo 28) describes a picture in which the blind Orion was carrying Cedalion on his shoulders: o 8' avrai arjfiaivet, rrjv irpos TO (£&>? 6Bov iiro~)(ov[ievo<;, Kal 6 "H\avel<; larat, rrjv irrjpaicnv, ical o "H<£<x«rTO? Arjfivodev etricrKoirel TO epyov.

From these facts it might be inferred that the scene of the play was the workshop of Hephaestus at Lemnos, and that the oracle mentioned by Servius was an element in the plot. But it is not easy to introduce the story of Oenopion's revenge or to discover the nature of the dramatic conflict. Hephaestus is represented as taking the side of Orion, except possibly in Pherecydes, if he is the authority whom Apollodorus followed. On the other hand, Dionysus and the satyrs are said to have assisted Oenopion in a proceeding which recalls the Cyclops of Euripides. We can hardly attribute both these features to Sophocles ; for we should then be forced to recognize a conflict between Hephaestus and Dionysus which is entirely inconsistent with the cult-connexion of these deities: see Introductory Note to the Daedahcs (I p. no), and cf. Stesich. fr. 72. In the Pandora we shall find satyrs working in the forge of Hephaestus; but there is no adequate reason for supposing such a situation here. The phallic 2character of Cedalion is implied in his name, which Wilamowitz no doubt rightly refers to Hesych. II p. 473 icrjSaXov alholov.

It should be added that according to schol. Horn. H 296 (cf. Eustath. //. p. 987, 11) Cedalion was a Naxian blacksmith, to whom Hera apprenticed Hephaestus to learn his art. But it is improbable that this statement gives the clue to Sophocles' plot, as Ahrens suggested, or that Hephaestus was handed over by Cedalion to his servants the satyrs, in order to receive his instruction from them3. 1 Kuentzle in Roscher i n 1038 thinks that the narrative of Servius was undoubtedly derived from Sophocles. 2 I.e. p. H33 This however was the opinion of Wilamowitz (I.e. p. 237).

IOOKAEOYI

IO

328 KOLL 817 TL Kal

TrapeiKa TWV

VTTO TOV Searos 328.

1 TQ apTv/i&Ttp cod.: corr. L. Dindorf

3 2 8 Herodian Tepl fiov. Xeif. p. 30, 18 oiiSev ofiS^repov ets as \riyov KaSapbv T$ e itapaMjyu Kara TTJII ivwty eidelav iv xpTJffei'EXXTJi'we, dXXa fiovov TO Kpe'as... Trpo
Seous. Hesych. I p. 464 S^aros" diovs. 2O0OKX^S KiiSaXloivi. (/ciSaXtp cod.). 1 Kal S-p...KaC adduces a particular instance in support of a general proposition: see Kuehner-Gerth 11 125. It is almost entirely a prose idiom. Here perhaps something like ' I am altogether amazed' preceded, /ecu TL Kal (Phil. 274), and moreover, is simpler and less emphatic. Blaydes would substitute Kal iroti TL Kal, after Phil. 308.—irapeiKa

probably means ' I have neglected to put in,' as Ellendt thinks. But in a suitable context ',1 have let fall' or 'handed over' would be possible alternatives. 2 iiro c. gen. of the inner cause: Hdt. 1. 15 iiiro dtovs Kal xaKov (pwvty —St'aTOS : Herodian quotes areafrom Xenophan. fr. 37 D., which is an exact parallel, as well as the anomalous Homeric KTedreaai (a 218). The history of these and similar forms is very intricate and obscure, even if we assume the existence of a stem dear-: see Giles, Manual, §§ 354, 361; Brugmann, Comp. Gr. II p. 250 E. tr. There is no obvious analogy which would give Searos or avedTetrai from stems in -e
329

3 2 9 Athen. 164 A Kara yap TOV So0oK\iovs KijSaX/wra i
satisfies the requirements of the present passage, but not that the editors of Aristophanes are right in entirely negKal T6 l[iaffTiyiaL...aXKoTpLO(payoi,' 8 dij lecting the first. In fact there an active £K T&V TOS 2OC/>OKXC'OUS efoai \iyerai. meaning seems essential to the signifiK€VTpiov«s. This word occurs also in cance of the context. Ar. Nub. 450, where the scholia give dXXoTpio<{>d'yoi was perhaps suggested two explanations: (1) Toureori x a ^ e 7 r o s to Sophocles by a reminiscence of the Kal
KHAAAIQN

II

330 T o t s jJ.ev X o y o i v T O I S c r o l c r t v o v f p f o v jxaXkov rj A e u / c w < ' v > XiOco XevKj/ cna.0iJ.rj. 33O.

2 V add. Bergk | Xewcfj ardS/xri Suidae cod. A, Tucker: XcvicV

Eustath., \CVKT) aTo.8p.-ri ceteri

33O

Schol.

Plat.

Charm.

154 B

long since recommended by Bergk, but

Xewrtj
' Toh...m-iSiifi' To the same effect Phot. lex. p. : 17, 11, Suid. s.v. Xeu/o)
in favour of the insertion. It is better, however, to place the preposition before \l8oj both for metrical reasons and because it would somewhat more readily fall out from that position: so Postgate, as suggested to Tucker, who had independently proposed Bergk's correction (C. R. XVIII 245). It is strange that the dative XeuKvj s Xeu/c?)
331 ocr' a.v yivrjTat, ravra

TTOLVT' OVOV crKid.

3 3 1 ocr' Hf yivyjTai (orav yivqrai Dobree) scripsi: on av TI yivyrai vel ylverai codd. | TavTa. Dobree: ret codd., raXXa M. Schmidt Old Comedy, wrote a play entitled 6Vou 3 3 1 Phot. lex. p. 338, 16 and Suid. 0o/cX?js KrjSaXioivi. 'STI given by the authorities (scholl. Ar. Plat., av TL yivrjTai TO. TT6,VT' OVOV
IOOKAEOYZ

12

under his control for the day, and after nearly coming to blows the disputants agreed to submit their difference to the decision of a law-court. We are also informed (schol. Plat, mentions Aristides [irepi irapoLfuwv] as his source) that Demosthenes, finding the jury in an important case disinclined to listen to his arguments, arrested their attention by telling them this story, and when he had sufficiently excited their curiosity, so that they desired to hear the sequel, he drove home his point that those who are so eager about the conclusion of a trifle ought to be all the more ready to give their careful attention to the defence on a capital charge. The evidence appears conclusive that feou <XKid was proverbial in the fifth century, and van Leeuwen's theory that its currency as a proverb did not arise until after the incident of Demosthenes' speech must be rejected. For, as Didymus ap.

Harpocr. p. 151, i r pertinently remarked, the proverb is itself parodied by Demosthenes in the de Pace (5. 25) wpbs irdvras irepi TTJS ev Ae\0ots aiaas vvvi TroKejiija'aL.

The story about Demosthenes does not require to be taken seriously ; but whether the explanation of the proverb is as old as the use of the proverb itself, and, if not, what is the real origin of the proverb, are questions to which no answer can be given. I have proposed So-'ftpy&i)Tai (see cr. n.), not thinking it likely that Sophocles would have written on av yiviprai (Blaydes) even in a satyric play (for the divided anapaest see on fr. 388): Dobree's fnav, with a comma after ravra, does not seem to give a satisfactory sense. Tucker thinks that the sense required is 'all his arguing to the contrary will be but ovov
332 O.VTOKTLTOVS 332 332

avTOKTfrovs Salmasius: avTOKriiTTovs cod.

Hesych. 1 p . 327 avTOKTiarovs

TreTpyipe(p7J avToKTir' SLvrpa, a n d for this

sense of airis in composition see n. on fr. 130. Verg. Aen. 1. 167 vivoque ~Zo(j>oK\rjs K^SaX^w^i. F o r the last words sedilia saxo.—Nauck thinks So/iovs avroof the gloss, which are meaningless, KTITOVS was the order, but, if the words Heinsius restored rj TOVS OVK [fj.Tj Kuster) were next to each other, OUTOKTITOUS | ^ d 4 $ : perhaps rather 17 OVK S6,u.ovs is equally possible, or they may have been the beginning of a line.

56/AOUS' ov KaTe
CIVTOKTCTOVS : cf. Aesch.

Prom.

316

333 TTVOJ)

333

Etytn. M. p. 753, 5 rcpdpda...

6 Se'Qpot 6 MIXTJCROS \eyei STI [eirai] irepl [a] &xPVffTa rLvcs CTrovdd^ovaiv, dvrl TOV KevotnrovSia' Trapd. TO repBpeiuv xal rep6pev6p.evos $epeicp&TT)S 'Aypiois. repSpia, [L4PTOI TTVOT) 81a rod t i] 6iri
Gais-

ford's notes are as follows : ' efoai irepi a] IT D ' (cod. Dorvill.).

'wapd T6...$epe-

Kpdrrjs] ir Kev ew/>£ D . repBpta,

irpoJ;]

dypols

TepSpla

fi4i>TOL TTVOT] 8 i a TOO X -q 6TTI.a

o-dla V (cod. Leidensis). 'dypols IxivToi TTVOT) Sia TOV I ^ owurlfla. K-q Kevbv tu'jpof

repdpi ' ""

M ' (cod. Marcianus).

' Locus videtur sumptus ex Sophoclis Cedalione, sed verba non extrico.' The name of Pherecrates' play was "Ayptot (fr. 18, I 150 K.), and his words were restored as Tep6pev6/iei>os K4V' ewparcu by

KHAAAIQN—KAYTAIMHITPA Dindorf, and as repdpevb/xevos Kevbv upcifei (Ap. Rhod. 1. 565). The meaning by Nauck. comes out clearly in Ar. Eq. 440, where rods repSptovs irapiet, j rb irvevf/.' i-Xarrov Dindorf was the first to recognize that yiyverat is contrasted with ib. 436 rod rep$pia irvori was the quotation from Sophocles, and that nivroi. belongs to the ToSbs Traptei' j ws odros ijbyj KaiKtas 17 avKO(pavrias Tree?. One would infer from this grammarian distinguishing repdpia from that repBpla irvoi\ was not so much a folrepBpeia.—On a ship certain ropes were called Tepffpioi: see Erotianglass. Hippocr. lowing wind (oTrta&ia) as a stiff gale, requiring the use of the end-ropes or p. 127, 1 Kai ot 7repi vavv tixireipoi repdpiovs K&\OJS 6vo[>La£ov bpovs KaXovaiV ol Ttpf)p-i.a-% comes, is etymologically distinct from repdpela 'empty chatter,' which vavrai, 08s Srav ivdi.Sif rb irvev/ia, irpiirovs contains a reduplicated root: see Brugex irptppas xa^<2
KAYTAIMHITPA For this title see I p. 219.

334 TOV O <XVT(XIOV

' ov Kadopare 334.

1 avT€ov codd.

2 wepidtvetiovT ov Ka.6opa.Tt scripsi (ireptdtj/eijovT' d at

Eurges): irepi.Si.v£ovTa oix Spare (ou%' opare B, ov x' opare C) codd. separate fragments, according to the opin3 3 4 Erotian. gloss. Hippocr. p. 45, 10 avraXov debv (dvreovdeov ed.)* rbv £S\d- ion of Burges, who gave them as 'rbv b"1 fl7}> virovoodfxevov airtov ^crec^ai avOpoiirov dvratov irepib'ive'uovT' and ' /cat decfjia Trpotr(dvdpdwois Welcker, but perhaps the TTV£OVT' an"' dvraias deov,' of Bergk, word should be rejected altogether). who conjectured 'rbv 5' dvialov Trepidrjdvratov 3' £KO\OVV ot 7raXatoi rbv (rujtppova veiiovrd (ir. = 'callidum esse') 8' bpdre' Kai l (so all the MSS, but the word is of course dei[/.a 7rpoo"irv£ovTa rdvralas 6eov' assigncorrupt. Welcker proposed 6\o6x bpq.s | Kai 5ei/xa irpoo"Trv4ovo~av »/a, 'the punisher,' which seems dvraias dtov; and Campbell, with still to satisfy the requirements of the passage), greater violence, rbv avrwv Trvtovra S' ws Kai XocpoKXijs iv KXyraiiiv-qarpq. \iyuv • otix bp£s debv Kai 5e?/j.a irpoatpipovr air' ''rbv 5£ avraXov Trepidt-v^ovra. odx bpdre;' dvraias deov, interpreting rbv...6cbv as the storm-wind sent by Artemis which deKai' ' dei/xa. irpoffTraiovra dvraias deov,' layed the Greeks at Aulis. Of these This very difficult and puzzling passage alternatives I prefer the former for two of Erotian has not been satisfactorily reasons: (1) the repetition of the adj. emended. So far as Sophocles is condvralos after so short an interval in a cerned, the most important question is continuous passage is difficult to explain, whether we are to recognize (1) two

IOOKAEOYZ unless the clauses are so balanced in order to contrast the goddess, whoever she may be, with the instrument which she employs. This is the solution of Welcker, who thinks 'Antaeus' was a demon in the service of Hecate (ivraias 0eov); but there is no evidence of the existence of such a supernatural figure, although Welcker's view is adopted by Wernicke in Pauly-Wissowa I 2343. That OMTOXOV is corrupt (see above) is in the highest degree improbable. (2) A still more serious obstacle to be overcome by those who support the continuity of the quotation is that of the metre. This is either ignored, as by Welcker, or thrust aside by the crude and improbable remedies already mentioned. Nauck, who prints the reading of the MSS practically unaltered, evidently regarded the passage as desperate. For the reasons given I have divided it into two fragments, of which the former may be rendered: 'ye do not perceive the enemy (avenger) hovering near.' But it is idle to guess at the nature of the reference, when we cannot even tell what was the plot of the play from which the words are quoted. The story of Clytaemnestra would permit an allusion to Aegisthus, or at a later time to Orestes. —T6V 8' dvraCov: this word acquired the meaning 'hostile, harmful' in the same way as ev&vnos: see on fr. 747, and cf. frs. 72, 400. Elym. M. p. i n , 43 KOX avralos, 6 /3\dj3^s atnos. But dvraios is particularly applied to the hostility of the gods (so in Aesch. Pers. 606 f. tfiol yap TJSTJ irdvTo. p£v tpbfiov ir\ia j iv o^/xao'iv T&vTala tpaircrai OeGiv, which is correctly

epithet of Hecate has chthonian associations. Etym. M. p. i n , 50 dvrata KO.1 ii 'EKCJTIJ eiriffeTiKQs. H e s y c h . I p . 209 avTaia...(rr}/j.aii'ei 5i Kai Saifiova. Kai TTJV "&K6.T1JV Si avraiav ~h£yov
for Lobeck's view that it refers to 6aiixbvia (sc. dvrata), which he substitutes for Sai/xova is unsatisfactory. Why should we not read avra, which is explained by Hesych. shortly before and clearly accounts for the appellative ? In any case iirurifiTrew shows that Hecate was so called as sending apparitions: see on Eur. Hel. 570. The epithet was also attached to Rhea, and there are two traditional explanations : schol. Apoll. Rhod. 1. 1141 17 Pia OSTW \eyercu, Slim ivavria rols Tekxiai.v iyivero, us Si Tives, avrairi i) d)\iTdvevros KOX ebdi/rrfTos. The second interpretation coincides with the gloss Uitnos given by Hesych. and Etym. M. (cf. Aesch. fr. 223), but it is not unlikely, as Gruppe (Gr. Myth. p. 15392) has already suggested, that eidfTr/ros and Ui<nos are really instances of euphemism : see Etym. M. p. 388, 36 eidvTr/ros • i) 'P^a' avralav yap airr)v iKaKovv Sia rb SvadvTTjTov elfat Kai rois diravruxTiv ev rots opeai Svoxepaiveiv. Dieterich (Orphica, p. 14) points out that eidvTTjTos frequently occurs in prayers to dal/wves. In the case of Antaeus, 'the adversary' or 'the ogre,' the generic term has been individualized. —irepiSivEvovTa, as translated above in accordance with the Homeric use of Swevw, yields an appropriate sense; but every conclusion is necessarily uncertain. —01S xaSopdrt is suggested to suit the anapaestic metre.

explained by the schol.), and as an

335 Seiva irpocnraiovT a < TT >' avTaias deov 3 3 5 Setva H . : beZixa codd. [ irpoairaiovT' air' H.: TrpotyiraLovra cod. Cantabr., irpoffiriovra ceteri codd., n-poavviovTa vulgo | dvrias codd. 3 3 5 Erotian. gloss. Hippocr. p. 46, 1, well authenticated, see the comm. on •quoted on fr. 334. I adopt Headlam's Aesch. Prom. 910. Nauck formerly conrestoration (C.R. XIII 3), though without jectured irpoaTpbwaiov, and other views much confidence. It is somewhat closer have already been mentioned in the n. to the MSS than Wagner's Sel/ra •wp6arov, viov), but I am reluctant to give to the Polyidus (fr. 400); but, so far as up Seijua, which is exactly the right word the evidence of Erotian goes, they appear if dvrala^ 8eov means Hecate, as has been to be attributed to the Clytaemnestra, and shown to be probable: cf. El. 410, with we have nothing to displace it. Jebb's note. For wpoairaiu, which is not

KAYTAIMHITPA—KOAXIAEI

15

KOAXIAEZ Sophocles was the only one of the three great tragedians to put upon the stage the adventures of Jason in Colchis which culminated in his capture of the Golden Fleece, after he had secured the powerful assistance of Medea. It is unnecessary to recapitulate the familiar story, either as narrated with all its details by Apollonius Rhodius in the third and the early part of the fourth book of the Argonautica, or even as summarized by Apollod. 1. 127—132. We must rather endeavour to ascertain which parts of the current legend may reasonably be attributed to Sophocles. The title reveals the scene of the action, and the fact that the chorus was composed of women—probably attendants of Medea—indicates the importance of her share in the plot. It is highly probable that the hostility of Aeetes towards Jason and his companions was attributed not merely to the savage and inhospitable disposition of the king, but partly at least to an oracle, which, according to Herodorus (FHG II 39), our earliest authority, declared that he would perish by the hands of his own kindred. In Apoll. Rhod. 3. 597 ff., where the fears of Aeetes are directed towards the sons of Phrixus and his daughter Chalciope, the oracle is thus quoted : <0? 7TOTC /3d ljIV

\evya\er]v ov irarpo1; i-rreicXvev 'HeXioio, Xpeioo fi.iv TTVKIVOV re 86\ov /3ouX.a9 Te yeve0\7]<s aa>iTepr)$ arr/v Tg TroXvTpcnrov i^a\eaadai.

On the other hand in Hygin./oA 22 and Diod. 4. 47 the oracle is made to warn Aeetes that the security of his kingdom depended on his continued possession of the Golden Fleece. The double task of ploughing with the fire-breathing bulls and sowing the dragon's teeth was imposed by Aeetes (frs. 336, 341), as in the ordinary version. The meeting between Jason and Medea, in which he asked for her help in the impending trial, took place before the spectators, and the instructions necessary to insure his success were given to Jason in the course of the dialogue which ensued : see schol. Ap. Rh. 3. 1040 ~Zo(poicXr}^ Se ev rah KoA/^itni> elo'dyei Trjv MrfBeiav viroTi6efikvt]v rco 'Idcrovi irepl rov

a&Kov Si afioi^aimv. There is nothing to show how the meeting was brought about, whether through the intervention of Chalciope and her sons as in Apollonius, or by some other means. But it is probable that Medea's passion for Jason was kindled, if not by the direct instigation of Aphrodite, at least by some divine agency: cf. Pind. Pyth. 4. 213. Fr. 345 probably comes

16

I0OKAEOYI

from a passage descriptive of the power of Love; but it is curious that Ganymede was represented by Apollonius (3. 115) as playing with Eros, when the latter was summoned by his mother in order that he might attract Medea to Jason. On the same occasion Jason seems to have taken an oath, promising to Medea that, if he succeeded in the trial, he would marry her and take her back with him to Greece (fr. 339); but it is worthy of notice that in Apollonius (4. 88) the oath is introduced just before the final adventure in which the dragon guarding the fleece was slain. It is pointed out in the notes to fr. 340 that the allusion to Prometheus was probably made in the course of a description of the Promethean ointment, which was given to Jason to make him invulnerable. Welcker finds a reference to the irapeicfiacns on Prometheus in an obscure scholium on Pind. Pyth. 5. 35 KOL 2O0O/CX^? Be iv rm Ylpofirjdei TOV TIpofAtjOicos, OeXwv Xeyeiv T?}? (frpovrjcrewi avrkyeaQai icai firj rfjs fiera/xeXeiw;,

thinking that Medea used the story of Prometheus as a moral to warn Jason to be forearmed against all contingencies. This is a far-fetched conjecture, and it is easier to suppose that the name of Sophocles was introduced in error, and that the writer of the note simply intended to quote Aesch. Prom. 861. The scholia to Apollonius make it plain that at several points in this part of his narrative the Alexandrian poet could be illustrated from the play of Sophocles ; and the dramatic character of the whole description of Medea's relations with Jason suggests that Apollonius was influenced by the Colchides to an extent which it is now impossible to trace. The success of Jason in his trials was announced to Aeetes by a messenger (fr. 341), but the subsequent development of the action is unknown. It is obvious that there must have been a further interview with Medea in preparation for the final seizure of the fleece, unless indeed Sophocles adopted a version diverging widely from Apollonius, such as that of the Naupactia-. That such was the case is rendered not unlikely by the fact that the two poets certainly did not agree in their treatment of the relations between Medea and her brother or half-brother Apsyrtus. For the various accounts of their parentage see on fr. 546, where it is shown that Sophocles, both in the KoX%i8e? and in the 2,/evdai, made Apsyrtus much younger than Medea. Fr. 343 (n.) proves that in the present play Apsyrtus, a mere child, was killed in 1 So first Boeckh, Tr. Gr. prim. p. 121 : Schroeder preferred to read 2ooK\fjs dt iv <• K6\xois KOX Ai(r^(yXos iv > ry KT£. 2 See the considerable fragments, mostly quoted through Herodorus {FHG II 40), and collected in EGF p. 200 f. p'or the literary history of the Argonautic saga see Jessen in Pauly-Wissowa n 745, 746.

KOAXIAEI

17

the palace of Aeetes. The motive for the crime is not explained, but the scholiast on Apollonius, who gives a fuller account of the story as told by Pherecydes (FHG I 89), states that Medea took the child from his bed at Jason's bidding, and brought him to the Argo; and that, when the pursuit began, he was killed and his body cut in pieces and thrown into the river,—clearly with the object of delaying the pursuit. The natural inference is that a similar motive prompted the murder in the house; for, if the reason had been 1different, it would probably have been stated by our authorities .

336 . . . kv

€KTTV€OV(Ji

O.TTO'

<j>\eyei Se fLVKTrjp, acr 336.

336

2 TrXev/idvaip (trvevixbvav Bergk) Nauck: TrveviiAroiv cod.

Schol. B Pind. Pyth. 4. 398

words, and I have not been able to find

TOVS TrvpiTTvovs Tatipovs 'Avrl/jLaxos e'v Aijdrj anything in the authorities to justify a8ep(fr. 9) ' H<paL(TTOTeijKTovs Xe'yet. KCU S O lA&Tovs, if by that word in conjunction

tp < OK\T)S > ... i)f os Se xaX/cous /3oCs ddepfid- with X^XKOCS it is meant that the bulls TOVS 7]v (see cr. n.) is now generally proposing £KTrve'ovv with •w\evix6v<M' see the edd. on Aesch. Theb. 61. The difficulty of restoration is increased by the obscurity of the introductory 1 From the recurrence of per agros in the Latin authorities (Cic. n. d. 3. 67, Ov. Her. 6. 129 etc.), it might be suggested that they were derived ultimately from a source which placed Apsyrtus' death in Colchis and not in Scythia. See however Introductory Note to the 2K!)0CU.

P. II.

i8

ZO^OKAEOYS

337 ov TreXas (j>6pov 3 3 7 Galen xvn i. p. 879 vvvl S' the necessity for transposing the text apuiaei. rots ypatniiariKoh dKoXovd^ffavra disappears. Thus it would seem that Tri/iipt.^ might be applied to a storm of Kara T^v tuelvaiv Sidra^iv clireiv n irepi wind and rain, though the idea of a TQV Kara TTI)V iri/xcpiya atiiiaivoijAviav. yi.p avTT)V ivl T77S 7 TTVOTJS J 02o0o-whirlwind prevails in Aesch. fr. 195 SXxois Xtyetv 'dirrjl;e KaTaiyi^ovra, fii) a' avapTrdffri Practically all our knowledge of the word irl|u|>i£ is derived from Galen's Soph. fr. 538, which Galen, as we have discussion which is the source of the seen, includes under the gloss irvoi\, present fragment. H e also quotes frs. storm is perhaps the best translation, 338, 538 and 539, as well as fragments as comprehending the ideas of flashing from Aeschylus, Ibycus, Callimachus, and light, blasting wind, and possibly heavy Euphorion. Outside Galen's notice irtiirain (see n. in loc). At this point we 0i£ occurs only once in Nicander and twice in Lycophron. The central notion must notice the remarkable transition of meaning by which ir^u^if comes to signify is air driven or expelled, a puff of wind; hence Galen finds the meaning irvoJi in a ray of light (twl TCIV AKTWOIV : cf. Phot. lex. p. 409, 10 7r^t0t£" TTVQ4\. Alo~xvXos the present passage, in fr. 538, and in Aesch. fr. 195. It is thus applied to air ftiavTplats 4TTI TCJV dKTivojv): so fr. 338, Aesch. fr. 170 oihe ir4fi$il- i)Xlov irpoo~enclosed in water, a bubble: Nic. Ther. 272 a\ Si ireXiSval \ (pXiKTaivai Tr£fiupit;tv SiptceTai, I oOr' do-repiOTrbv 8/i/xa A^Tifias teiSb/ievai. U6TOIO, where the schol. rightly Kbptis. It may be surmised that in strictness a moving, flashing light rather says: wefiipt^i. Si rah (pio-ais, rais h than a steady flame is implied. Thus in TOTS iiSaai ywo/iivats iro/j.rf>6Xv^i.v. some respects irifiip^ is seen to resemble Galen notes its employment to express drops of rain (^7ri rwv Kara TOUS &)j.(}povs wpriffTi/ip, the fiery waterspout, as described araybvuv), quoting Callim. fr. 483 (11 by Lucr. 6. 424 ft. Moreover the concatenation of the ideas of wind, cloud, p. 640 Schneider), and Euphorion (v. and light is illustrated by the pronounceinfr.),—both doubtful passages; and similarly, drops of any liquid (iiri rijs pavlSos), ments of contemporary meteorology, parquoting Aesch. fr. 183 firjS' at/iaros Trijj.- ticularly that of Anaximander (fr. 20 <j>iya irpbs irtSip fi&Xris, and fr. 206, a Diels), with whom Anaximenes (A 17 Diels) agreed: Aet. plac. 3. 3 irepl difficult passage corrected by Headlam in C. R. XV 18. In Ibycus fr. 17 TTUKLVIIS (UpovT&r do~Tpa.irG>v Kepavvwv itp-qo-rtipwv re Kal rv<j>iiv(ai>. 'Aval-l/iavdpos (K TOV irveiiri/icpiyas inbiievoi, which is stated to /iaros TCLVTI tcdvro. ffvfifiaiveif 6Tav yd.p occur in a simile referring to storm-tossed 1 voyagers (/card TIVO. Trapaf$6\i]i> CTI x^f ^ p ^ fi tyixtvtav elpyj^vqv), driviitg rain or mist TT) Xeirrofiepelf ra£ KOV<J>6TI)TI, T6T€ i) (lev is undoubtedly meant. The extract howpyj^ts Tbv *pb<pov, 7) Si StaffToXrj irapa TTJV ever follows fr. 539, and is included by fieXavlav TOV vitpovs T6V Siavyao-fibv Galen under the signification cloud (iirl dwoTeXeZ It should be added that LyTOO viipovs SoKet Ter&xOai). Bergk main- cophron in v. 686 dKabffti Kei9i TenftSuv tains that there has been a displacement 6wa and in v. 1106 employs ir£fj,tl; in in the text, that the quotation from Ibycus the sense of a ghost. This development ought actually to follow Aesch. fr. 183, was no doubt influenced by popular and that eirl Si TOV vt<povs KT£. was the belief and philosophical speculation on concluding portion of Galen's disquisition. the nature of the tyvxh. It is tempting But if we suppose Ibycus to have pictured to find the same meaning in the corrupt his travellers as enveloped in a blinding line of Euphorion (Meineke, anal. Alex. mist of rain-clouds, vi(pn is an intelligible p. 118): riTedaval (so Bentley for elire S' paraphrase of Trvnwas Trt/xfayas (cf. dvdrj) Tr£/j,i.yes iTnTptigovai davbvTa. (0aChrysippus II 701 Arn. rty 6fiix\riv vbvTav ?); but Galen's authority is not to vi<pos 8iaicex<s/ievov...&t>i.ppoi' Si Xdfjpov be lightly disregarded. iiSaros xol iroXXod tic v&pwv opav), a n d The present fragment is unfortunately

KOAXIAEI corrupt. Bentley conjectured loviov TT^Xas ir6pov or x^u0i£ 4% ew

affxeros di&ffovffa 0X6£ oXouv raipav, Such 1292 wvpos a-iXas dfiirveiovTes. 6pov. aekaa(pbpov seems certain, b u t also was Hermann's view when he proM. Schmidt's ijhlov is clearly preferable posed us hrvov ae\aa6pov is perhaps possible. 410 ar6fiarL (p\6ya tpvcrtdoivres, 1048

338 KOLV

TTJ\ 4(TKOTTOV

xpvaeav

3 3 8 . 1 Kan iSai/j-affas Hermann: K&V iBainaaa vulg., Kdiredavfiaffa. Bentley 2 TtjkiiTKOirov Bentley: rrjSe (TKOTT£>V vulg. 338

Galen xvil 1. p. 880 eirl 5£ TWV

CLKTLVWV CLVTGIV SoKet xprja&ai Ty ryjs Tre/J.~ 0

0i7os ovo/ian 2O0OK\^S iv KoXx " Kara. rd5e TO. iirr)

'KHV...ifttiv.'

For the meaning of xcp.(|>i| see on fr.

337.—It seems almost certain that these words refer to the brightness of the golden fleece : cf. Apoll. Rhod. 4. I7off. —For xptxreav scanned as a trisyllable cf. fr. 483, and see Jebb on Track. 1099.

339 avffvTrovpyrjcrai 339

iiro/j.vvs scripsi: VTO/J.VVS codd.

imposed, he should receive the fleece. Wecklein (£. ph. IV. 1898. 739) refers this and frs. 337, 338 to the dialogue avdvirovpyTJffai.' TO AvTairodovvat x^Piv' i mentioned by schol. Ap. Rhod. 3. 1040 2 \ KX Tj (77 P h o t . ) ty... in the order 339, 337, 338. p inro/ivv/u (see cr. n.) does not occur, Welcker suggested that these words except in the middle voice with the were spoken by Medea to Jason, asking technical sense of swearing an oath for him to swear to make her his wife and the purpose of staying legal proceedings. take her back to Greece, if she lent him In view of the frequency with which her assistance. He quoted, among other compounds with tiri and inrb are confused passages, Ov. Met. 7 94 servabere munere (for examples see Cobet, N. L. p. 379, nostro: \ servatuspromissadato,a.aAZ&nob. Coll. Crit. pp. 92, 505; Madvig, Adv. 4. 92 (=Apollod. 1. 129) MriSei.a....eiray- Crit. I p. 516), it is much more probable e 7^X\trai TO dipas iyxilP'iaa ^ 6/j.6
2O

Z0*0KAEOYZ to be accompanied by an inf. not in oratio obliqua: a good instance is Eur/

in the place of the future after certain verba declarandi is not yet settled. See Goodw. §§ 127, 136, Kuehner-Gerth 1 196 f. There is no doubt that in many of the instances discussed by Madvig (Adv. Crit. I p. 155 ff.) and others the future ought to be restored, and it is hard to resist the claims of ivexvpdffeaffai

('expect me to deign')

27. 59
Or.

1527

n&pos, el SoKeU Me r\i)V
is t h e case with -qiiX = KaT&
consent,' for which he quotes Theocr. Sinev. — virqvpyeiv

<pa.ai )xoi ibid. 1141. On the other hand, xdpii* occurs in Aesch. Prom. 662 and Eur. Ale. 842. certain of these verbs show a tendency

340 OVK dp' rjCTTe TOV 3 4 O Etym. M. p . 439, 1 nai XotpoKXTJS K6\xois 'i/ieis...TlpofiT]$ia,' CLVTI TOV ijSetTe.

The Argument of the Promelkeus of

quite general in his notice of the incident. H. refers to the schol. on v. 889 ISias 5£ 0 iroirp-i)s TepaTetierat. Ta irepi TT/K pl£av irap3 ovdevl yap TUJV pifroTSfihiv eUpijTai, and

compares the fables connected with the mandrake [fiavdpaydpas), which the ancients used in surgical operations to (KoXx^i Brunck), irapa 5' Eipnridri 8Xus cause insensibility to pain: Dioscorides oi Kelrai. Welcker (p. 335) inferred with PP- 571> 574- He takes occasion thus to great probability that the occasion of the translate the description of Apollonius: digression in which the story of Prometheus was recounted was the preparation It rose to birth of the magical ointment, which Medea Of old time in the far Caucasian plains, gave to Jason in order to protect him When from the ravenous eagle fell to against the attack of the fire-breathing earth bulls. This (pap[/.a.Kov Upofi'rjdeiov, as it Some crystal blood of sad Prometheus' was called, was made with the shreddings veins. of a plant which grew on the slopes of The flower thereof was as a cubit high, the Caucasus; it was gathered on the And in its colour as the saffron's hue, spots where the devouring eagle had let And raised upon two stalks; but underfall drops of Prometheus' blood (Apoll. ground Rhod. 3. 844ff.). Cf. pseudo-Plut. de The root was like new-severed flesh to fluv. 5. 4 •yevva.Tai. 8' iv airq) (KavKacrip) view. fior&VT} JlpofJLT]6€tOS KoXoVflivi), f\V M^Seta This like the dark sap from a forest (rvXKeyowa Kal \etoTpL(3oQ(ra irpos avriira.tree, 0elas TOV Trarpis ixp^aro (Cleanth. fr. She'd mown and gathered in a Caspian 70). Val. Flacc. 7. 355 ff. Prop. 1. 12. shell, 10 lecta Prometheis dividit herba iugis, First in the running water bathing well, appears to be an allusion to this story; And seven times calling upon Brimo's otherwise it is difficult to account for the power, mention of Prometheus. We may conIn sable weeds, at murky midnight clude then that this was one of the points hour,— in which Apollonius followed the lead of Brimo of Earth, ah, nursing mother Sophocles in the Colchides: see Introdread, ductory Note. Observe that Pindar Pyth. That walks abroad by night, and queens 4. 221 aiiv 5' f ' W u (pap/j.aKii
TOjUa o~Tepeav ddvvav | bQiKe x/^

'0

is

KOAXIAEI

21

341 AI. AIT.

77 /SXacrros OVK e/3\a.(TTev KCLL Kpara

(f)pL^a<s < y

>

^ p ev\6^)r)Kd>iJi.aTi

3 4 1 . 2 Kpara Bergk: jcdpra cod. | 0pf£as rcDf ev\6a acp-qKiliixeva cod.: 7' add. J., et)\<S07)K(I>paTi corr. Valckenaer ex Hesych. IV p. 258 />(£as ev\6<j>tp ( i ; rod avatpds t tos Hemsterhuis) 3 fiifrpbs f^iSv Rutgers: p.T) Tpo 'if...ovinx&pt-os'; itrfir/KWiiTO ("tightly bound"). ir(f)-rjKui/j.a \eyovTa ' Kal KapTa...Trpoae^i5v.' v. 2 is is a part of the \60os, as appears from quoted by Hesych. (v. cr. n.). The Ar. Pac. 1216, where, in a dialogue words of the schol. show that v. 1 between Trygaeus and the \O<J>OTT01.6s, the belongs to the king. former admits, TO o-^/cw/i' ?xel T^OXOV irokiv. It is the lower end, pinched in 1 Aeetes enquires of the messenger, to fit the 0d\os, or ridge of metal, on the ' Did not the native brood of the land Kpdfos (see art. Galea in Diet. Ant. n {i.e. the armed men) start up?'—when 899). Cp. Ap. Rh. 3. 1354 oi 5' yd-n Jason had ploughed. Kara irairav avavTaxitoKOV &povpav \ yq 2 The alteration KpaTa and the addiyevees ' (ppl^ev de lrepl (TTifiapoh ov TO

342 ev£,coi>ovs ecrracrav 3 4 2 Pollux 7. 68 apfioTTOL 5' av T)\6tv), appealing to the play of Epicharmus entitled 'HpaxX^s 6 iirl T'OV TCUS fovais Tavrcus (women's girdles) r6 \vai£uvov elTretv, 0 re TTJS 'A/xafrovos ^war^p,fuo-TTJpa (p. 104 Kaibel). But the recovery of the title does not Kali) en Tais So0oitXeoi;s KoXx'"'"' (so A: the rest have fwar^ptrt^) eirL^oxTTpa' X^yet solve the whole difficulty. iirifaaTpa ol ras 7r l (I T as does not occur elsewhere, and is not the 70ft'' '?x ' --^ 'f ^ ' P -' kind of word one would expect to find Until the MS known as A had been in Sophocles; indeed, as Nauck remarks, collated by Bekker, whose edition apnot only are the words corrupt—for peared in 1846, the texts of Pollux gave T at an y r a t e i s required—but the \{33GTT\P<JIV in place of KoXxtVty; and the ix°" ts whole sentence is unlike tragedy. It strangeness of the title puzzled the earlier reads more like a mutilated fragment critics. Brunck did not believe in the from an Alexandrian writer of elegiacs possibility of such a play; but Welcker, such as Callimachus or Euphorion. irepiafter some hesitation (Nachtr. p. 292), fao-rpa is used by Anaxandrides (fl. 375— pronounced in favour of a satyr-play on 350 B.C.) fr. 69, n 162 K. Heracles' quest of the Amazonian girdle (Pind. fr. 172 Ka.ip.ZTa faarrjpas'Ap.afovos

22

I04>0KAE0YI

343 [ 6 *A*fivpTO<; idyy) Kara

TOV OXKOV TOV

AirjTOV.J

aiffxpus TOV i/ibv KTelvaea K&aiv), where 3 4 3 Schol. A p . Rhod. 4. 228 2o0oK\9IS Se iv Ko\xt
344 [Ne'aijoa 3 4 4 Schol. A p . Rhod. 3. 242 Aioctfaios 5c 6 MiX^o-ios (a mistake for MuTiKrivalos: FHG II 8) 'J&K6.TI)V /airipa MijSeias Kal Kipurjs (scil. \iyei), us irpoeipryrai, 2o(poK\rjs N&ipav plav TQIV l&tip-qlSw!', 'H
difficult to see how the mistake could have arisen, since it is certain that in the 2,KIJ$OU Sophocles made Idyia the mother of Medea.. As there is nothing to show that he did not make Neaera her mother s, it seems better to transfer the fragment here. For further information see on fr. 546.

345 viraiOcov rr/v Aios TVpavviSa 3 4 5 Athen. 602 E S Si {sal. Sophocles) iv KoXx'fft nepl Yavv^Sovs TOV (TIVO. A: corr. Kaibel) \6yov iroioti/j.evos 'ir/ipol?...Tvpavvida.' Ganymede was probably introduced as an example of the pervasive strength of Love, to whom Zeus, the sovereign of all, was himself subject: cf. fr. 941, 15 Aios Tvpavpei ir\ev/ji6t>av (Kiirpis). The erotic element in the story of Ganymede is post-Homeric, appearing first in Pind. CV, 1. 43 ff., 10. 104ff., but by the end of the fifth century it was a familiar

allusion : in E u r . Or. 1390 Ganymede is Aids e W r a s , in l.A. 1049 Aids \tnTpuv Tp6
adtvos.

346 Kakov (jtpovelv TOV BvqTov avdpuiTTois tcra. 3 4 6 Stob. flor. 22. 23 (III p . 589, 8 combines with l
KOAXIAEI—KPEOYIA

23

347 3 4 7 Hesych. n p. i33^7roX\ax^«ffaeiraXXafaaa. 2O0OKXT;S KoXx'ow. The heavier first aorists, such as d7ri;X\dxSw, i8p£<j>9T)v, tfiKdcpS-qv, i so forth, passed out of use in late Greek, giving way to dirriWdyriv, irpd
corruption has arisen in consequence: see Valckenaer and Porson on Eur. Phoen. 979 (986) and Headlam, On editing and Aeschylus, p. 104. But tiraWayds does not occur, and iira\\&TTeu>, never a common word, is generally intransitive from the time of Aristotle onwards,

348 Kvvapa. 3 4 8 Athen. 70 A Kivdpa." ravr-qv So416) £vvdpa. (1. Kvvapa) TJ duavBa irapb. tpoxKrit iv KoXx'ci" (/foxX(cri C E ) Kvvapav 2ooxXa" 01 vvv KVvdpav (lavdpav corr. raXe?. Herodian Philetaer. cod. Vat. Nauck) \£yov<xiv. For this word see on 2226 (see L. Cohn in Rh. Mus. XLIII fr. 718.

349 3 4 9 Lex. Messan. f. 281 r. i/eoa"0. &a...v crvv TQ I naOa KOX TO w.

veSppvros a n d veoirvGVGTos; for the verbal from an intransitive verb see also on fr.

2O0O/CXT}S KOXXOIS.

534.

veocrej>dSa.crTos is otherwise unknown, and should mean 'newly struggling,' like

application of <70a5afc<j see on fr. 848.

For

the

addition of the 1, and

the

KPEOYZA

There are only two certain references to the title Ion (frs. 319, 320), which has been with high probability identified with the Creusa.

Creusa was also the name of (1) Priam's daughter, the wife of Aeneas, and (2) Medea's rival, who is commonly called Glauce (Hygin. fab. 25). But, if the latter had been the Creusa of Sophocles, we should surely have heard more about the play in which she appeared. Although the fragments themselves throw no light on the nature of the plot, the general opinion is probably correct that the heroine was the daughter of Erechtheus and wife of Xuthus, and that the story, like that of the Ion of Euripides, was concerned with the fortunes of her son Ion, who was born

IO0OKAEOYI from her union with Apollo in a cave on the Acropolis (Pausan. I. 28. 4). Until adopted into literature by the tragedians, it is probable that the history of Ion's parentage was only preserved orally in connexion with the local worship of Apollo at Athens. At any rate, it finds no place in the mythological hand-books, and as we have no other channel of information than the play of Euripides, it is impossible to say which of the details are the invention of that poet, and which, as belonging to the common stock, may be assumed to have been retained by Sophocles. Welcker infers from fr. 353 that the chorus consisted of female attendants on Creusa. On the strength of Eur. Ion 323

ftcofioc /A' e<j>ep/3ov oviriwv T' del givos he assigns frs. 354 a n d 35*5

to Ion, and supposes him to be speaking of his own poverty which made him dependent on the charity of visitors to the temple. Fr. 357 is referred to a contemplated revelation of Xuthus similar to his confession in Eur. Ion 550 ff.; but it might equally well be regarded as a cry of Creusa, when forced to disclose her story.

350 ravT icrrlv aXytcrr', rjv irapov Oicrdcu auros TIS avThi rrjv fiXdfirjv npocrdrj (fr 35O.

1 at- Tr.

2 avT(fi Tr.

3 5 O Stoh. flor. 4. 38 (in p. 229, 1 rk Trpay/iara, ucrre... Lucian (Hermot. 36) Hense: omitted by SMA, preserved i. 778 (TV TOVTO irpoapirdo-as ISuras tpipav by Trine.) TOV avTov Kpeotiaq. (so Schow rots 2TWIKO?S, {Icarom. 5) ii. 757 TOUOVTOV from two MSS, for which see on fr. 77: iSirio-av /j.e TTJS iraXcuas efypoias dira\\a£a!, omitted by Trine). ' TOVT1 .. .iptpuiv.' wore Kal els fielfovs airopias tpipovTes ive§a\ov, Diphilus fr. 64 (ii 562 K.) ewi 1 trapov: cf. Phil. 1099 evri ye irapbv tppovTjffcu | TOV Xtfovos SOI/AOVOS et'Xou TavTT) v I eis TO iitaov iirexbpevae rb naiaov alveiv.—6eV8cu Ka\c3s: it would aaTtipSris /u^yas, and with eavrbv Aeschin. seem here that TT\V fi\af}iiv is the object: 3. 90 vwi^aXev eavTov cptpuv Or/^aiois. cf. O. T. 633 PUKOS e$ 6tcr0cu. For Tt0eer0cu He adds that the idiom is illustrated in the Thesaurus, s.v. riv,'findingan awkwardness, as I 131), and might be rendered ' if he goes suppose, in the article. But it is possible and inflicts the hurt on himself.' Nauck that the context would have made everyproposed 8t\i>iv, Stadtmueller rptywv, and thing clear, as would be the case if e.g. F. W. Schmidt v in its place; and TCIV 5£ aviA<j>op(bv preceded raOr', pro-Mekler conjectured Trj fSXap-r) Trpocr0fj viding StaOcu with an object.—cj>e'p
KPEOYZA

351 ocrri? Se ToKjxrj 77^009 TO Beivbv p fxev r) yKwcrcr ecrnv, a
5' el,iu lrpbs rb Ko.pre.pbv, proposed

yris ye irpbs TO Stivbv el/J.' iyih, Med. 403 epw' es r6 Beivbv, Hec. 516 rj lrpbs TO SCLVOV •fjhdeB' lis kx9pi.v... | KTdvovTts; ('Didye

ib. 852 Tbv ye Aaiov ov | (pave? SIKCU'WS opdbv. Ant. 1178 Toiiiros u?s ap' opdbv

T6\[II)S

for T6\IMTI; but there, as Verrall pointed out, the meaning is rather ' to pursue'the course of boldness.'—6p9r\ is not easy to render exactly. Although the adjective sometimes comes near to the English true or good, it is strictly limited to the external aspect of an action as measured Tys O'CLOV, dyadijv i:\iri5a \ irpb&aWe aavrc}, TOVTO ycyi>ib
approach the dread task?') Elmsley,

ijvuiras. So here the brave man's words come true.

on the strength of Eur. Med. 394 TO\IJ.7]!

352 KOLXOV jxev ovv OVK ZCTTL TO. xfjevhfj Xeyeiv OTca 8' okeOpov Stuvbv aXrjdeC ayei, crvyyvaxTTOv eliretv icrrt /cat TO /X-*) KO\6V. 352.

2 rj aXijdeC vel i) aXr/deta. codd.

352 Stob.y?
The sentiment is not unlike that of fr. 28, but is still nearer to Phil. 108 f. NE. OVK aio-xp'o" Vy£ Si/Ta TO ipfvSij \iyeiv; OA. ofe, ei TO auBrivaL ye TO feOSos <j>epei. Cf. Diphil. fr. 48, II 557 K. viro\aiifia.v<jo TO ipevdos eiri aoiTT]pla I \eybfj.evov ovdev TrepnroceTffdat 5VJ-

Xep^s. M e n a n d . f r . 7 7 7 , I I I 2 1 6 K . tipe'iTTOv 5' e\e
suggests that the lines were spoken by Xuthus in reference to his intention to conceal the relation of Ion to himself. But the words more naturally suggest the secret of Creusa. 3 (TvyyvioiTTov. Nauck would prefer to read (ruyyvoiTov : but see on fr. 203.

SOOKAEOYI

26

353 XOP.

ovre ydp ydfiov, w OVT

av

€K/JL€TpOV 5k

ivSov ^l St (f)0ovepal yap 6Soi Buecheler 3 5 3 . 1 x a i t e O&TC S 2 o\§ov iKfierpov codd. traiecit : ae Seidler: eS^ai/i' &v fere codd. 353

Stob. flor. 38. 16 (ill p. 713,

p . 68, 9 de

B . iK/ierpos

ev^al-.

TTXOUTOS

pfi

6 Hense) '2iotj>ok\iovs Kp4ov
XP""'0"-

Eur.

490

KTC&VWV

p Marriage above one's station was to be 3 e'vSov, of wealth stored in the house: avoided: cf. Aesch. Prom. 913 r\ crowds see on Eur. Hel. 907, Phoen. 552.— •r) irotpbs rjv 8s | irpSiTos iv ymb/ia T65' £J3&- ei)(jcu|i.av, wish. See Headlam on Aesch. araae Kal yXuicrcrif 8tefj,v$o\6yr)(rev | u s Ag. 1340. TO Ky]5evaa.L Ka@' eavrbv dptcrrgiiet [/.akpy, 4 0ov€pal yap 680C. The sentence in reference to the saying of Pittacus rijv is probably incomplete, as Ellendt reKara aavrbp £\a (Diog. L. 1. 80). Pind. marks. ' For many there are that walk Pyth. 2. 34 xph 8£ K i7-' airov alei iraPTOS in the paths of envy' seems to be the conbpav [xtrpov. E u r . fr. 214 KTJSOS KCCO' text required. For 6S0I then cf. Ant. 1274 avroii TOV irixpbv KT&aBai xp^i>v. Rhes. 168 iv 8' taewtv ayplcus oSois. Pind. Nem. & ifiavroO /lei^dvav yafielv d£\w. 1. 25 XPV 3' f" ebdeltus bSoh ardxavTO. Eur. fr. 502 6Voc yapovai 5' 17 ytvei fiapi>a
354 fjL~q TL davfidcrrj^ /u.e TOV KepSovs, ava£, ' avT€)(es anpltj e^ovTai, Kami irpbs TO. xP7jfJ'aTa dvrjTolcn TaWa BevTep'• elcrl S' oiVifes alvovcriv dvocrov dvSp'- ifiol S' ovSels 8o/cei elrai w€V7]<s a>v dvoaos, dW del voaelv. 354. 4 dwpif M 354

Stob. flor. 91. 28 (iv p. 742,

1 Hense)~ZaiCKtov%Kpiovaa. ...voffeiv.

' KOX /«§

Meineke conjectured that these lines were written by Euripides, and that the passage quoted from Sophocles by the anthologist had accidentally fallen out.

It must be admitted that the concluding lines have the Euripidean tone ; but it is worth notice that Sophocles is the only tragedian who is known to have used dirpif. Hense thinks that the Creusa may have been a late play: see 1 p. 62. 2ff. Nauck urges that instead of

KPEOYIA IMucpov filov we should rather expect TTXOBTOI* jiSadiiv, which Blaydes modifies to Tt\ei
The criticism is beside the mark; for the sequence of thought is: ' Don't be surprised that I cling to gain; for (1) the passion for gain survives even in the old (who have lost all other desires), (2) money is the greatest good. Thus Kal in v. 2 corresponds to Kal in v. 4, a more emphatic combination than TC... TC. not only...but also. For avarice as the special infirmity of old age see Arist.

rhet. 2. 13. 1319 s 14 at TS yap iTri8v[ilai avelica K^pdei, T h u c . 2. 44 OVK €i> T£ axpcLy TTJS TjXiKias TO K€pdaiv€tt>, ojffirep rivts <paai, fj-aXXov Tipirei., dXXd rb Tiimtrdai.. Cic. de sen. 65.

The reference in Thucydides may be merely to proverbial wisdom, although it has been supposed that Simonides was intended: Plut. sen. resp. ger. 5 p. 786 B

27

source, derive the word from a privative and irpiu> (7rp(fw), ' to saw,' S ovx olov re irplaai 5ict TT\V a6ixtpvGi.v. But the gloss of Cyrillus aTrpll- 'tiriros' 6 o-K\ijpvv8ds Kal

frSanwv Tbv xa^LVOV i'7r7ros, when compared with fr. 897, points in the true direction. Cf. Alciphr. 3. 54 eyui 5' &irpi% TCiv K€pf/.d.Twj' eixb'/J-yVi airoduyeiv irpbrepov fi irpoio-ffai TI inelvois TS>V l ireiropLGtxtvojv aipoufievos.—irpos T Eur. fr. 95 d\X' oudev rjuytveia irpbs TO.

Xpi)/«i™.

See also on Eur. Phoen. 439

Ta xP^M a r ' dpOpttjirocfft TLfjuuTCLTa. For

the use of irpbs, ' in comparison with,' see Jebb on Ant. 1171, Ar. Lys. 860. 5 ff. elcrl 8' ol-nves refers to the famous scolion (8 Bergk) beginning byialveiv /lev {LpiGTOv dvSpl 6va.Tty. See also on fr. 356.

—l|iol S' ovStls KT€. This seemingly paradoxical statement would be less 21i/j.ai>idT)S SXeye irpbs TOUS iyKaXovvTas startling to a Greek audience than it is avT(fi (piXapyvplav, o n TWV dXXojv direaTeto us, for it would recall to them the pr)fx4vos Sid TO yrjpas T]BOV&V inrb /xias eVt proverbial wisdom of Hesiod Op. 686 7?)/)O(3o(r/ceiTai TTJS avb TOV Kepdaiveiv. Xpij/tara yap ipvxh fAerat SetXoiat /3poHOT. A.P. 169 multa senem circitmveniunt Tolai, which is imitated by Timocles fr. incommoda, vel quod \ quaerit et in35, II 466 K. Tapyipibv iaTw alfia Kal ventis miser abstinet ac timet uti.—ye h fth' I 8(TTiS 5^ /XT] %Xei TOUTO, jUTjS' often appears as marking the apodosis of OUTOS jcterd ^VTWV Tedvtja sentence, whether the protasis is inKWS veptiraTei. Similarly Diphilus fr. troduced by el or some other conjunction, ov<Jiv 105, II 574 K. irevla 5e TOZS £x °$ or consists, as here, of a relative clause. (Tfutcpa vbaos. The thought that natural In such cases it may either emphasize a single word or spread its force over the advantages such as health and birth (cfEur. El. 38, Phoen. 442) are not of much whole of the conclusion. See Neil on avail, unless accompanied by sufficient Eq. p. 199 f.r who quotes Ant. 657 and wealth, may be illustrated by Ar. Av. E u r . Bacch. 443 as 5' aB
Meineke's TOVTTL-

605 OJS avdpoiirbs ye KOLKCIS ivpaTTwv are-

KepSatveiv is thus unnecessary, and the Xv&s ovSels uyiaivfi, Bacchyl. 1. 55 ei 5' vyLelas | ffvaTbs ewv '4Xaxev, \ %&eiv r ' d?r' simple verb suits the context better, as the ot/cetuw ^x ef ' I TrpuTOis epi'^ei. It is propassages cited above will show: so fr. 28, bable that these passages ought to be 3.—dirpt|. For this word see Jebb on used to interpret Pind. 01. 5. 23 iiyitvTa At. 310, 1030. The prefix is from an original sm- (Skt. sa), as in S.Tra.%, air\ovs 5' ef TIS b\[lov apiei, which is understood by the commentators of the righteous etc. But the evidence for an aspirate in use or acquisition of wealth. Aristodirpij is inconsiderable: cf. &\oxos and phanes coined the word 7rXoi<^i;7(cia to see Brugmann Comp. Gr. I p. 421 E. tr. denote supreme human bliss.—For the It should be added that the ancient zeugma by which IKCKTTOS must be evolved authorities (Hesych , Etym. M., Suid., from ouSeis see Jebb on Ant. 262, Kuehal.), all of whom go back to a single ner-Gerth II 567.

355 TC C

8',

w yepaie;

TIS
3 5 5 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 119, 6 ava- cording to Reitzenstein the gloss was -epoi 0A/3os, yjX6yos,TJ tiraivos, T) XoiSopia. derived from Phrynichus (fr. 210 de B.). O^O/CXTJS Kpeotivy 'H 5'...0<5/3os.' AcavaitTepovv is now for the first time estab-

IOOKAEOYI

28

lished as belonging to the vocabulary of Sophocles. Cf. Eur. Suppl. 89 its 06£ jti' foaiTTepoi. Or. 876 ayyeX/j.' dt

puxe AavaiSCiv irbXiv. And for the metaphor in general see on fr. 94 r, 11.

356 KoWliTTOV

icTTL TOVvSiKOV

TTeVK€Vai'

\qi
2 X<2 SMA.

L. 2. 136) rb Tvxel" iv av TIS eriBv/irj' 3 5 6 Stob. flor. 103. 15 (iv p. 905, etire ' 7roXX

357 , aTreXde, Trou • r a S ' 357

OVK

aKovcrrd

CTOL.

<7oi om. cod. Coisl., coniecerat Bekker

3 5 7 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 65, 18 conjecture that the words ii> Trj...aKov (add. EUendt) aKovvitw. but fit to be heard, as also in O.T. 1312, (pTjal. iroXiTiKihrepov 5£ Xeyei b Qpijvtxos Eur. Andr. 1084 dtcovvou 8' ote aKotiaff (fr. 13 de B.) rb dicovcrrd JUSXXOI/ 9) rb 8y.us S4\a. In Eur. Hel. 663 (see my n.) i the word is corrupt, as well as in Eur. fr. For dKov
KPEOYIA— KPIIII

29

358 3 5 8 Hesych. 1 p. 193 a aveLXytpa. ZO^OKXTJS Kpeot)o*?7 cod.). Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 131, d Z \ ;0 0 2 0 X ^ ^ The form &T7//iai appears first in Horn. I 401. Afterwards it was generally restricted to the Ionic dialect (see Weir Smyth, § 583. 4), but is found occasionally in Plato and in Aesch. Prom. 821 KOIVOV

m . Philologists are not agreed on the explanation of the phonetic irregularity, although a confusion with the augment and the analogy of £<m\Ka. and ippurya. have been suggested: see Brugmann, Comp, Gr. iv p. 23 f. E. tr., and Kuehner-Blass 11 23 f. The fullest collection of the facts will be found in Curtius, Greek Verb, p. 358 E. tr.

359 icro0a.va.Tov 359

Pollux 6. 174 {K Be rod lao

IV6KW\OS etc., lao9i.va.Toi may have been

itrovofios iVore\^s...To 5' lao66.va.TOv Xo<po- an epithet of those who, like Saul and K\£OVS tiirbvTos 06 irdw avefcrdv. Jonathan, 'in their death were not

We cannot tell whether Sophocles followed the analogy of ia6vetpos, iV60eos, iaoTrpeaf3vs etc., and used the adj. as an attribute of a noun like irados (cf. Ai.

divided.' Pollux condemns the compound as an extravagance; and Jebb made a curious slip (on Ai. 2i4f.) in saying that ' Sophocles used ia06a.va.T0v 215 davaTip yap tvov ir&0os €/cireij
KPIZIZ IATYPIKH Although the evidence for this title is very scanty, the existence of the play is free from doubt, and its subject—the Judgement of Paris on Mt Ida—is clearly indicated by fr. 361 (n.). The play was satyric, and was a sequel to the "Epi9; see I p. 139. To the evidence there adduced for the appearance of Kplcns and in this connexion add Eur. Hel. 26 fiop(prj<; BeXovcrcu Sicnrep ppj i 'i deoi d iS O f d etfraiSpwav, frp pdvacrdat Kpiaiv. ib. 678 'iva poptfidv evOev f pi Tro. T 924 expire rpiaadvd £ei)
the version of the Cypria, about which we only know that Hermes conducted the goddesses to Mt Ida by the command of Zeus, and that Alexander, moved by the promise of Helen's hand, preferred Aphrodite to her rivals (EGF p. 17). Apollod. epit. 3. 2 adds that Hera promised universal empire, and Athena victory in war. See also n. on fr. 361.

360 /cat ST) apei T&5S' a>s tung), and F. W. Schmidt conjectured rifd' us %xu a n ( i Naber TIJ fivaaivip. JaH e r m . p . 444) oBev KO.1 rb v. X^£. spoken by a satyr, who had appropriated p. 36, 23 dXXii Kara trvardMp' irapa 2o<pofor himself the robe of one of the KXCI ev Type? (fr. 586) ' ffwevSovcav dirty iv de TroiKiKip <papeL,' < Kal kv Kp/ffet aarv- goddesses taking part in the submission to Alexander's judgement.— 05/>os is pLKij 'Kal drj tpapei> T£p5' ws e/Jy ^ctXi)Homeric and older than (pdpos; but the TrTOficu.' Several words were omitted in word is believed to be of foreign origin, the text of the last passage owing to the which may account for a variable proeye of the scribe having wandered from the first appearance of 8°
361 \rj ^x,ev 'A<j)poSiT7] rfiovrj, rj Se 'Adyjva (j>p6vr)cri,s oucra.] 3 6 1 Athen. 687 c SO0OKX^S 8' 6 witz, Eur. Her?, I p. roi). It has even iv Kp£' otiyKpiaiv • TrpoKpiBetaris yovv rijs by Horn. 0" 192 KdXXei' ftev oi irpwra 1

A
7] T}dovr}, irdvra trpoaiinraTa KaXa K&ffripev | afifipoalip, olq irep iv efrr' av trj Xapirwi' x°P^v i/tepdevra. But it is

awerapdxSri. If we leave out of account Hes. Op. 287 ff-, this is the earliest instance recorded in literature of the allegorical presentation of the conflict between Pleasure and Virtue, which afterwards became famous through the fable known as the Choice of Heracles extracted by Xenophon from the 'fi/sai of Prodicus {Diels, Fragm. d. Vorsokratiker*, p. 657). Although the moral is implicit in the story of the Kpl
much more likely that traces of Sophocles can be recovered from Callimachus, Lav. Pall. 15 ff., whose picture reproduces exactly the details mentioned by Athenaeus: fiA] fivpa Xwrpox<5oi rq. IlaXXdSt /j.riS' dXa{06 yap 'AOavaia ^pi^iara /JLIKTO. <j>i\et) olatre, fj.r)8£ KaroTTpov • de! Ka\bv 0/i.fj.a rb olid' feet rap "ISQ

£Utca&v

tpiv,

KPIZII—KQct>OI

31

V pbSov $i
OIJT' is SpeLxaXKOv fj.eya.Xa debs otre 2tfXOVVTOS

e"[5Xe\f/ev divav is dLatpatvofiivav' ovo' "Hpa* K(J?rpts 5e Siairy^a xaX/cop eXoitja 7roXXd*a rap ai/rdf 5ls fj.eTe$tjKe Kofaav. a Se Sis e^riKovra Sia8p4^acra SiavXois, ofa Trap' Ei)pt£ra rot AaKeda.LiJ.6v 101 dffTepes, ifiTepa.fj.ojs iveTpltj/aro Xtrd Xapoiaa Xpfyiara T£S t'Si'as Zxyova
1} K d o r w p 1^ Kai xf>'ieTal oia€T€ Kal KTtva ol irayxptiaeov,

p

; , u>s a T r o

p / ^ f f Meineke thinks that from Sophocles came the description of Pallas running in the stadium, as well as the comparison of her blush to the morning rose or the flower of the pomegranate. See also on fr. 785.

KQc{>0l IATYPOI The subject of this play is unknown: Welcker (Nachtr. p. 295) conjectured that the 'dumb' men were homicides under a ban of silence, possibly on account of the murder of Icarius. This is not very likely, if the ica>§oi composed the chorus. I should rather be inclined to guess that the Koxfiot were ' blockheads ' (Hesych. II p. 566 KOH$>6V avalaOi^rov fj,cop6v: cf. schol. Ai. 911 o iravra

K(O(f)6<;...i'ya> Se, §r)alv,

6 avaiaBrjTOt; /caTrjfie\7)
like Maccus and Bucco in the Oscan Atellanae (Marx in PaulyWissowa I 1918), or the stupidus of the later mime (Juv. 8. 197). Perhaps we may compare jSXevvov ' rbv vwdr) Kal jxwpbv "Zdx^paiv

Upo/Mrjdel (Epicharm. fr. 119 K.). Wagner, who anticipated this suggestion, inferred from fr. 362 that the subject was the gift of fire by Prometheus to the satyrs, who provoked laughter by their clumsiness and stupidity in using it. Headlam, who also thought of Prometheus (/. P. xxxi 9), understood the title to refer to the condition of the satyrs before their eyes were opened (cf. Aesch. Prom. 463). 362

nepl ovov 3 6 2 Schol. Nic. Ther. 343 npo/4178ea TO irvp Kktyavra Kal TOIS avvpwirois dd ol Xafitovres £fj.T]vvo~av, ov i ) xP f ots TOV Aia cpaaiv iiraiviaavTa <papixo.Kov avTOis ayripaoias dovvat' TOI)S 5£ Xaj36vras airoiptpuv Tb 5wpT]6ev iirl &vov' T6V Se dixf/ei Tei.pbiJ.evov iXdeXv els Kprjvqv, yv e
'6(pLv Tbv Trjs Kprqvqs (pvXaKa KaTaXafieiv TO 5iif/ost b'dev Toh dijxveiaiv ifxiroiei Styav. iaTi 5e 6 IJ.VBOS irapa. 2O0OKX« ev Kuxpols. Aelian nat. an. 6. 51, who tells the same story in somewhat different language, a d d s : TL O$V ; eyCj TOV /xvdov iroit}T7}S; dXX' OVK av eiiroL/xt, tirel Kal irpb £fj.ov SO^OKXTJS 6 TTJS Tpaytpdias iroirjT7)S Kal AecvdXoxos b avTaywto~TT]S 'YtTUXapv-ov (CGF I p . 149 Kaibel), KOX "IpvKos 0 'Priyivos (fr. 25) Kai 'Apiarias (an early tragedian, whose satyr-plays were especi-

IOOKAEOYI ally celebrated, is meant: see Paulythey exchanged; and hence the f Wissowa II 899) Kcd ' kiroWoQdvris (fr. 9, every year renews his youth by casting I 799 K . ) won/rat KUIUfidias tj-Sovaiv airbv. his slough (airoSiieTcu rb yijpas is the The myth therefore was an old one: regular phrase),—but he also got the Nicander prefaces his version in Ther. Ass's thirst, which his bite inflicts upon 343—358 with tiyiyios S' apa fivBos iv his victims' (H.). For the popular belief that the water fj Qp of a spring is guarded by a snake cf. 'We have here one of those beast fables, E u r . Phoen. 657 (v$a <j>6vios r\v Spdxoiv | which are still told among the Arabs, to account for the peculiarities of various "A/>fos ii/j.6(f>pwv 0i5\af | vd/iar' ivvSpa xal pie&pa I xXoepA Sepy/A&TWv Kopaici ] TTOanimals. Prometheus gave the stolen \vir\dvots iirurnoirwv, supr. fr. 226. T h e fire to Man, but (according to one version) Styx river in Arcadia was locally known they were dissatisfied because he had not as the Dragon Water: see Frazer's Pauendowed them with perpetual youth; at sanias IV p. 252. Examples from all any rate, they foolishly informed against parts of the world are collected by the their benefactor; and Zeus rewarded same writer in vol. v p. 44 f. The them with an antidote against old age. They put the precious burden on an Ass's precious burden entrusted to the donkey, and consequently imperilled, recalls the back to carry. It was hot weather, and proverb ovos dyav /iv&rifipia, at least the Ass, coming to a spring, besought according to one of its interpretations the Snake who guarded it to let him em TS>V dva!-lws TIfia<3Ta.$bvTu>v(Diogen. drink. The Snake—a Sifds—said, " I 6. 98, Greg. Cypr. 3. 19 [Paroem. 1 will do so on condition that you give me "-86, 369]). what you are carrying on your back." So

363 ris ovos Lcrocnrpios 363

Schol. Apoll. Rhod.

r. 972

ovos p. 2037 B. From its resemblance to

\4yerai Si i'ouXos Kai £$6v n, 8-qpLSi.ov a bean it came to be called Ktia/ios: Galen irokfiirovv ' eKaTtpwdev yd.p £x€t voWoiis de simpl. tned. fac. XII p. 366 Kuehn 7r65as, uairep r) ov iroMwow tr/cwXijicwSes, S (rvveiXr/div dypoLKlas iariv ISeiv wkelarovs roirovs b'fiOLOV KvdfjLCp tpaiverai. H e s y c h . Ill p. 209yevvojfxevovs virb rats vSplais. It was 6V01 iado-rrpios (fvoais oatrpiov cod. : em. also called t h e Kepdfif3v% or £v\otpdyos Salmasius) • £<m Si fyov iroXiirovv, otnrpiif j3oCs, A n t o n . L i b . 22. 6/j.owv, 8 Kal lov\6v Tivis tpatnv.

Were it not that this is a satyric frag?ou\os was evidently the woodlouse; ment, one might feel sure that the correct see Hesych. II p. 62 i\eio6s, p. 30 ei\6'Cos, order of the words was ovos I labairpibs p. 356 l\rjoi, and Stephanus in Thes. s.v. ris us. (H.)

364 oi 'iScuoi Act/mAoi.] 3 6 4 Schol. Ap. Rhod. 1. 1126 2O0OKX)JS S£ aiirois (sc. the Idaean Dactyls)- $ptiyas KaXei iv Kw0o?s auripois. It is not possible within the limits of a note to discuss adequately the diffi-

culties arising from the various notices relating to the Idaean Dactyls : the fullest storehouse of information is Lobeck's Aglaophamus II 1156—1181. They are often localized in Crete, but there is also

33 strong evidence placing their home on Mt Ida in the Troad. The oldest is that of the epic Phoronis (fr. i K.) fy$a y6r}T€s | 'Idcuot Qpfiyes dvSpes dptffrepoi oitd£va.iov, | K4kfxis AcL/uLva/xevevs re jj.4yas Kal virepfiios "AK/J.OJV, | evirdXa/xot 6epd7TOVTCS opelrjs 'AdprjaTtlys, \ ot irp&rov r£yyy\v iroXv/J.r)T LOS 'H0aioToio | edpov ev ovpeiyat vd-irais, ibevra , j es irvp r ' TjjteyKCLv Kal dpnrpeires £pyov £5eitae. T h a t

appears to be one of the authorities which Sophocles followed in this and the follow-

ing fragments. Ephorus also testified to the Phrygian origin of the Dactyls: Diod. 5. 64 '4VLOL 5' io-Topovatv wv £wos els TTJV ^vpihirrjv. id. 17. 7 yevtcrdai 5' ev Totirq} (cave on Trojan Ida) Xeyerat Kal roiij '15alovs AaKTijXous oi)s arlfirjpov epydcaadai wpwrovs, IxaOhvras TTJV ipyaaiav irapd, rijs T&V dewv /J.7}Tp6s.

365 365

Zenob. 4. 80 (Paroem. 1 106)

(so cod. Ath. according to Miller, Mil. de

simeparvo | Celm 1, lovi, where it will be observed that adamas answers to 6 arepeciraros alii\po%, but Juppiter has taken the place of Rhea as the offended deity. It seems to follow that Celmis was turned into iron as a punishment for insulting Rhea. Rhea is here spoken of as the mother of the Dactyls; but Nonn. 14. 26 identifies them with the Corybantes, and calls them yrfyevies, explaining that Rhea

lift.

£K x^ovos aiTOT^XeuTOV dvej3\diJT7jtTe yev£-

aid'/jp^)' avryj TaTTerai tiri T(OI> ff6dpa eavroLs iriGTewaVTOiv, on ia-xitpoi Kal 5u vwd TQV a5e\uiv ev/xevws < i^fvi^ero > kv rrj "ldy.. .aip' oil 6 orepeajraros eyevero (ridripos. Hefiv7)TaL T^S laroplas 2ooK\ijs iv Kutpois Gr. p. 370: om. Zenob.)

aa/rvpofi.

Unfortunately this passage is mutilated: I have added the words ore and i£evi£eTo which seem to be demanded by the sense, but we also require the finite verb to which K4X/U5 was the subject, describing the punishment awarded to him for his arrogance and impiety. Celmis is the first name among the Dactyls according to the Pkoronis {I.e.), and is mentioned with Damnameneus as chief of the Idaean Dactyls who discovered iron in Cyprus by Clem. Alex, strom. 1 p. 362 (EGF p. 150). In Nonnus 14. 39 he appears as one of the Telchins: Gruppe

6\T)V. Usually, however, they are descri-

bed as attendants or assistants of Rhea, who, as mistress of the heights of Ida, made use of their labours to work the metallic ore buried beneath the mountain: Pollux 2. 156, Diod. 17. 7, Strabo 473. The welcome given by the Dactyls to the goddess on the occasion of one of her visits to them was related by Hellanicus in schol. Ap. Rhod. 1. 1129 'IScuoi Ad/cruXoi iKXr/S-rjirav OTL evrbs "Idrjs ffvvTvx^vres TT; 'P^a ide^Libu av ro TTJV 6ebv Kal TU>V SaKTtiXwv atiTrjs ij^/avro. We

seem to discern the vestiges of a story of the Philemon and Baucis type, which was eidon's attendants in Xonn. 37. 164 etc., prevalent in various parts of Asia Minor. and connects the name with
366 TOVS TrpatTovs (sc. 'IScuous ACIKTVXOVS) •yeveadau, irevre Se Kal dSeXc^as TOVTCOV.^\

\TT€VT€

366 Strabo 473 AaK-rii\ovs S' 'ISaiovs (patri Tives KCKXijo-OaiTovsirpdirovs oi'/cijTopas rijs Kara TT\V"\ST\V viroipdas...So0oitX-i}s <W oterat T^VTC TOVS irpuirous dpaevas yevtadai,

P. II.

apcrevas

ol oiSripbv TC i^tvpov Kal eipydaavTo wp&Toi Kal &XXa 7roXXa TQV wpbs TOV filov XPV"'1jua>j>, 7r^re Si KCLL dSe\tpas TOVTUV, CLTTO Si TOV dpLdp.ov SaKri/Xovs K\rj&TJvai. aXXot 5'

34

ZO*OKAEOYZ

a \ \ u s fiu8fiovaiv...irdvT£s Se elp\oi/s KtuXTjadcu \iyov0c(ivKaL{v4>pvyi<}yKr)k6Tas yeyoi>4vai wapaSeSiliKcunv, oi Se Sixa tpaaiv irepl TT\V "IS171', Qpvylav TT)K Tpipada teavirdpxovTas rvxfi" Tairrjf -rijs vpo^riyopias, XouvTes Sii. TO TOI>S 4>/)i57OS twiKparijiTCU rots if rats xefpovs ovras TTJS Tpoi'as inveiropdiiavs. T h e most attractive explanation BriiUrris. of recent times is that of Wilamowitz,

Various explanations were given of the name Dactyls, such as that it was given in virtue of their dexterity in handicrafts, or because they grasped the hand of the goddess in welcome (fr. 365). Sophocles is the earliest authority quoted for the numerical explanation, but it is unlikely that he invented i t : the Phoronis, as we have seen, only recognized three Dactyls. Cf. Pollux 2. 156 Kai rois 'Idalovs Aa/cri/-

who finds in them an analogue of the dwarfs in Teutonic folk-lore: they were Tom Thumbs who were called idaioi because they lived in the woods (GGN 1895, 241). Kaibel, however, in a posthumous paper (GGN 1901, 488ff.),preferred to interpret the Idaean Dactyls as phallic deities, supporting the explanation of AO.KT6\OV /j.vij/w. in Pausan. 8. 34. 2 previously given by Belger.

AAKAINAI

The story of the play was taken from the Little Iliad of Lesches, and is summarized in the epitome of Proclus (EGF p. 27) : Kal fiera ravra (i.e. after the visit of Odysseus to Troy disguised as a beggar, when he was recognized by Helen and made arrangements with her for the capture of the city) avv ^tofirjBei TO HaWdSiov

€KKOfj.i^ei i/e T>}? TXiov.

T h e order of

events agrees with the evidence of Arist. poet. 23. I459b 6, where in a list of tragedies taken from the Little Iliad the trTw^eia—an otherwise unknown title—immediately precedes the Ad/caivai. The occasion is identified beyond question by fr. 367, as explained by the authorities which are quoted in the note1. The epitome of Proclus suggests that the information which induced Odysseus and Diomedes to undertake their dangerous adventure was derived from Helen by Odysseus on his previous visit. This was to the effect that the possession of the Palladium by the Greeks was essential to their success. According to Apollod. epit. 5. 10 Helenus was captured on Mt Ida by Odysseus, and, when brought into the Greek camp, was forced to reveal this secret, together with other information concerning the conditions necessary to the capture of the city. The same tradition is followed by Conon 34 and Qu. Smyrn. 10. 350. On the other hand, there are several passages recording that the theft of the image was promoted by the treachery of Antenor, who not only informed the Greeks of its importance, but also with the assistance of his wife Theano actually surrendered it to 1 The two visits of Odysseus to Troy are confused by Apollod. epil. 5. 13; and the same mistake appears even in texts of the classical era. See n. on fr. 367.

KftOl— AAKAINAI

35

them (Diet. 5. 5. 8, schol. B Horn. Z 311, Suid. s.v. HdWaSiov). There is nothing to show how Sophocles arranged these incidents, and it is doubtful whether the complicity of Antenor, which is inconsistent with his character as portrayed in Homer, was first introduced in one1 of the Cyclic epics, by the Attic tragedians, or some later writer . Nevertheless, fr. 368 is particularly appropriate if addressed to Theano, as the custodian of the image2, in order to induce her to hand it over. It is highly improbable that Odysseus and Diomede removed the statue by violent entry into the temple in the crude fashion suggested by Conon's narrative3 ; but, on the other hand, their success does not necessarily imply that Theano and Antenor, or either of them, were actuated by dishonourable motives. The Spartan women, of whom the chorus consisted, must be taken to be the attendants of Helen; for no others can be thought of as likely to be present in Troy. Their sympathies would naturally be enlisted in favour of the enterprise, and the home of Helen was a rendezvous to which the two adventurers would be likely to resort, especially if the theft had previously been arranged with her4. Fr. 957, which is attributed to the play by Welcker and others, is suitable to Helen; but the source of fr. 768 N. is now known to have been the Eurypylus, and the supposition that fr. 745 is addressed to Antenor is a mere guess. A much more important question arises in reference to Welcker's suggestion that fr. 799 belongs to the Lacaenae. The extract is taken from a speech of Odysseus attacking Diomedes ; and there is no record of a quarrel between these heroes except on the occasion of3 their return to the Greek camp after the theft of the Palladium . Diomedes was carrying the image, which he had managed to secure, but Odysseus wished to enjoy the sole credit of the achievement and treacherously attempted to murder his comrade. Diomedes, however, saw the flash of his sword in time to ward off the blow, and, in order to prevent a repetition of the trick, made Odysseus walk in front of him with his arms bound, driving him into the camp by blows with the flat of his 1 See the different opinions expressed by R. Wagner in Pauly-Wissowa I 2352 and Holzinger on Lycophron 340. 2 Horn. Z 299. 3 Vergil also (Aen. 2. 164 ff.) describes a forcible seizure and the slaying of the guards. 4 Engelmann in Roscher in 1943 reproduces a vase-painting of Helen assisting in the robbery of the Palladium. For the archaeological evidence see also O. Jahn, Der Raub des Palladion, Stolberg, 1845. 5 The authorities for what follows are cited in the n. to fr. 799. As against Brunck's view, it should be observed that a quarrel between Odysseus and Diomedes has no particular relevance to the plot of the XivdeiTnoi, so far as we are acquainted with it.

36

IOOKAEOYI

sword. Hence, it was said, arose the proverb Ato^Seto? avdytcrj, as applied to those who were forced to act against their will1. The strength of Welcker's case is materially increased b y a gloss of Hesychius (I p. 517), which, though unfortunately incomplete, proves that something of the kind was related in the Little Iliad (fr. 9 K.). It is obvious that this story was ill-suited to dramatic representation, and it may be conjectured that the two heroes contended with words rather than with blows for the possession of the prize. Somehow or other their strife must have been composed before they left the scene, possibly by the intervention of the goddess herself. Fr. 799 has not been included under this title, since its ascription to the Lacaenae is, after all, hardly more than a plausible conjecture. 367 S' ehvfiev xf/aX[Sa KOVK afiopfiopov. 367

afibpfiopov Blomfield : apdpfiapov codd.

367 Pollux 9.49 l^frq Si 7r6Xews... 7ruX(5es Kal \j/a\ldes. (<m Si -q \pa\is elSos otKoSofi'fip.a.Tos • rj TTOV Kal 2o0o/cXj)s iv Aa.Kalva.is X^yei' '
4K5VVO.I pdicevir Kpv
dXXa Kal TYkaTwv iv TOIS if 6/ji.ots [947 D] • confuses it, as Starkie remarks, with the '8jlKr)i> 8' iirb yijs airdis dpr^a.
368 6eol yap OVTTOT', et TL XPV fipoTov keyeiv, ap^acri <&pv£l TT)V KCLT 'Apyeicov vfipiv £vvaiv4crovTcu r a v r a . /JLT) )jid)(ov ySia. 368. 2 'Apydwv Bllendt: 'Ap-yeLovs codd. 3 EYNAI N E S O T A T A Y T A codd. VR: corr. Madvig, qui tamen ante raSra interpungit 3 6 8 Priscian Inst. 18. 197, II p. 302, addressed to Theano in order to persuade 15 Attici, ipx"> TOVSS Kal r6Se, ivl TOU her to give up the Palladium. Kardpxa- Sophocles AaraiWs' 6eol...filq..' 2 'Ap-yHwv. The reading of the The words may form part of a speech MSS is unintelligible; the only meaning 1 Welcker is mistaken in comparing the proverb with ireiBavdyKri: it is more like our 'Hobson's choice.' He also seems to be wrong in preferring the version of Conon which gave the victory to Odysseus. As compared with Suid. and Zenob. it shows obvious signs of interpolation. See also Frazer, Pausan. II p. 264.

AAKAINAI

37

which could be extracted from it—'an and dat. of the person: ''will grant...? outrage after the Argive pattern'—is The word is not common and hardly unsuitable to the context. H . quotes in exists in Attic prose. When used with support of the genitive At. 304 Sarjv an ace. rei it means ' to assent to,' as in KOT' avrdv tijipai iKTeiv 'Axaioiis Swpd fxoi (vml4. 11. 10 [v 216, 1 Foerst.], where veaov (mistranslated 'promise,' an imMenelaus in the dTrai-njiris addresses to the possible rendering). Xen. Cyr. 8. 5. 20 Trojans a similar argument: STI ftev odv avv T~Q TOU irarpos yvthfxri.. .ravrd is. Blaydes, however, would superior might is proverbial: cf. e.g. Eur. substitute Tijs...v^peas. fr. 604 irpbs KtvTpa. fir/ XaKTife TOIS KparoOcri (TOD, fr. 716. See also on fr. 585. 3 £vvaiv«rovTai is followed by ace.

369 iv f/ TTaucrer' afiepSiv

re

/ecu

SCWOTTJTOS

3 6 9 Herodian ir. IAOV. X^|. p. 40, 12 fiirpov KaKoraros Ztpv; Liban. 4. [13. 2 (11 945 Lentz) r& /A&T01 irapa 2otpoK\e? [ v 374> XI Foerst.] d Kai pirpov cis iv Aa/ccurais SavoT-qs elp-qjxivov (elpijfitvosT)fj.as OVK didev r\ Tvxy. Theocr. 15. 45 cod.) 'iv ^...davoTrJToi.' iryiws hv i=xpi el /j.6pfjt.aKes dvdpiBfxoi Kai afierpoi.—(i6\6(i>v Trap' bvofia -aTu;9ih) certainly mean, ' if it were apepiav, with doubtful sense. Lobeck proposed apyaXiuiv, but Nauck's aixirpuv, formed from a noun.' The grammarian's ovofi.a includes our adjective (Dionys. in the sense of immeasurable = d/ueT/^Tam or dvi)piBixav, is much better. H. supports Thrax p. 23 Uhlig); and Lehrs, whom it by quoting Simonid. fr. 37, 16 evdirui Lentz follows, thought that Herodian intended to refer to a suggested derivation 5' afierpov KO.K6V. Soph. El. 236 Kai ri

38

IO<J>OKAEOYZ

from the adverb Siv in the sense of XP°- favour. Much better is Duentzer's 5oibvibrrit. But the natural inference is -rijros (also proposed by Herwerden), rather that he was in the dark about which should be provisionally accepted. Savorip, and did not know of any ovoixa In supporting it H. remarks that w6\efwv to which it could be referred. Two other KO1 SriiorrjTa is a frequent combination in explanations have been given: (i) From Homer, e.g. H 29 vvv ixiv waiabipev Plut. quom. adol. poet. 5 p. 22 C SAvov TdXe/iov ical SijioriJTa, id. 200 rvv /xiy yap MaKeddres roc davarov KaXoOffi it is iravv and bvoaovof Stand' Aestus vel si locus ferebat sitis,' Lehrs. ij/ov
AAOKOfiN The earliest mention of the Laocoon-story is in the Iliupersis of Arctinus {EGF p. 49). When the Greeks had withdrawn to Tenedos, leaving the wooden horse behind them, the Trojans held high festival in the belief that the war was over. During the progress of the feast two serpents appeared, and killed. Laocoon with one of his sons. Aeneas and his family, alarmed by the omen, fled to Mt Ida. It has been inferred from this statement1 that the death of the elder son of Laocoon typified the downfall of Priam, who sprang from Ilus, the eldest son of Tros; whereas the escape of Aeneas, the descendant of Assaracus, a younger son of Tros (Apollod. 3. 140), was symbolized by the escape of the younger son of Laocoon. Anyhow, the introduction of the repw; into the narrative of the Iliupersis served the purpose of supplying a motive for the emigration of Aeneas and his kindred from Troy to Ida. Dionysius of Halicarnassus (fr. 373) provides a connecting link between Sophocles and Arctinus, by stating that Aeneas was represented in the Laocoon as removing to Ida by the advice of his father Anchises, who inferred the impending destruction of Troy not merely from his recollection of Aphrodite's behests, but also in part from the warnings recently given irepl rov<; AaoKocovTlSas. From the last words Robert draws the important inference that Sophocles differed from Arctinus in 1 The literary history of the myth of Laocoon, including the treatment by Sophocles, is discussed by C. Robert, Bild u. Lied, esp. at p. 192 ff.

AAKAINAI— AAOKOQN

39

making both the sons of Laocoon perish, while Laocoon himself survived1. He argues that Dionysius was not guilty of a careless inexactitude of expression, since the greater number of the authorities agree in stating that both sons were destroyed2. Lessing long since pointed out that Vergil was the first and only poet who represented both the father and the two sons as perishing, and Robert is of the same opinion3. Thus the famous Vatican group can have nothing to do with the play of. Sophocles4. Robert proceeds to trace the influence of the Sophoclean version in Lycophr. 347 KOX Trat8o/3p<wTo? XiopKew; vrjaov; SnrXas, where the serpent is described as ' childdevouring.' Servius on Verg. Aen. 2. 204 (fr. 372) states that Sophocles in the Laocoon gave the names of the serpents, and the same authority (n. on fr. 372) cites the actual names from Lysimachus in the Nosti as (Turin's and Periboea. These names are, in all probability, a corruption of WopKis and Xapiftoia, as they are recorded by Tzetzes on Lycophr. 344. Now, since Sophocles named the serpents, Robert infers that Sophocles was the source of Lysimachus, and also of the scholium on Lycophron. But the scholiast further describes the serpents as ' having sailed' (•7r\evo-avTe<;) from the Calydnae islands, which recalls the treatment of Bacchylides (fr. 51 J. = 32 B.) as recorded by Servius on Verg. Aen. 2. 201 sane Bacchylides de Laocoonte et uxore eius vel de serpentibus a Calydnis insults venientibus atque in homines

conversis dicit. It seems impossible to give a satisfactory explanation of these remarkable statements. Welcker, who first called attention to the points of contact between the authorities, observed that, if Sophocles mentioned their names, it must have 1 The validity of this reasoning was impugned by R. Foerster (Verhandlungen der 40 Versammlung deutscher Philologen in Gorlitz, 1889, p. 432 ff.), who argued that AaoKowPTiSas could properly be employed so as to include the father as well as the sons. He quoted (among other examples) the use of Aeneadae in Verg. Aen. 1. 157 and rrj 7rpo5o
40

IO<J>OKAEOYZ

been because the serpents changed into men; for there could be no other object in recording the names. Robert, however, mainly on the ground that the word irXevaavres could not suitably be applied to serpents, concluded that they came over in human form and were afterwards changed into serpents,— thus attributing to Sophocles a tradition which is the exact converse of the version of Bacchylides. But this conjecture is not only improbable in itself, but inconsistent with the epitome of Apollodorus (5. 18), which by various touches shows its connexion with the Lycophron-scholia: Bvo yap Bpd/covTes SiavrjIjdfievot, Sid TJ? AaoKomvrov

vloiis

KaretrOloveriv1.

According to Hygin. fab. 135 Laocoon, son of Acoetes (substituted in error for Capys) and brother of Anchises, was a priest of Apollo who had incurred the anger of the god for disobeying him by marrying and begetting children. The names of his sons are given as Antiphates and Thymbraeus2. The cause of Apollo's anger is differently given by Servius on Verg. Aen. 2. 201, who says that Laocoon had profaned the temple at Thymbra, ante simulacrum numinis cum Antiopa uxore sua coeundo. Now, the Lycophron-scholia make the temple of Apollo Thymbraeus the scene of the disaster, and also differ from Hyginus in making Laocoon the son of Antenor3. Hence Robert, who had already identified Sophocles as the source of the scholiast, concludes that the circumstances of Laocoon's guilt, as given by Servius, were also derived from Sophocles, arguing that it was a favourite tragic motive to localize the punishment at the place of the offence. He also considers that Sophocles derived from Bacchylides the idea that Laocoon had sinned against Apollo, as well as the version that both his sons (but not he himself) perished4. Probably the opening of the play described the rejoicings of the Trojans at the supposed departure of the Greeks (fr. 370), and perhaps also the debate as to what should be done with the wooden horse, in which Cassandra and Laocoon may have uttered a warning of the impending danger but without success (Apollod. 5. 17). Itseems that a sacrifice to Poseidon in grati1

See also Engelmann in Roscher 11 1840 ff. Robert holds that the text of Hyginus has been considerably interpolated from Vergil, i.e. from Aen. 2. 201, 203, 231. M. Schmidt (p. xxv) regarded the whole chapter as an interpolation by someone who was more familiar with Vergil and Ovid than with the Greek sources. Foerster, however, argues strenuously in favour of its genuineness, and since, for various reasons, it cannot have been derived from Arctinus, Bacchylides, or Euphorion, he concludes that it must contain the version of Sophocles. 3 Among Antenor's children Homer mentions K6wc (A 248) and Aa&SoKos (A 87). 4 op. cit. pp. 197, 200. 2

AAOKOQN

41

tude for removing their enemies was resolved upon (fr. 371)1, and Laocoon was perhaps instructed to carry it out. The subsequent catastrophe must have been reported by a messenger, and either the-same or another messenger announced the departure of Aeneas (fr. 373). That Laocoon had sinned against Apollo, as stated by Servius, is probable enough; but it is difficult to conceive him as merely the passive victim of destiny throughout the whole course of the action. In other words, the early transgression is too remote to serve as a dramatic justification for the irepnriTeia; one would rather suspect that Laocoon by some fresh demonstration of u/3p
2
3 7 0 Harpocr. p. 5, 1 ar/vias...etev 6" av ot irapa rots 'ATTLKOU \eyotiepot dyvte'ts oi vpb TOIV oitaCiv fiup-ol, (is airi Kparhos (fr. 37;, I 118 K.) Kal Mivavbpos (fr. 983, Ill 249 K.). Kal So^o/cX-ijs if rif AO.OK6UVTI, p.erayoii' TO. 'kByvaioiv £8i\ eh Tpolav, 077|ios: see n. on Eur. Phoen. 631. The ayvabs is explained by grammarians and scholiasts as dwv is of v \r/yoiv or KwvoeiSys dan: and a stone of this kind, the relic of an archaic fetish-worship (cf. apyoi \i0oi), was commonly placed in front of Athenian houses.

This may have received the outpourings of libations, or have been decorated with ribbons and garlands : but it is a mistake by reason of the obscure gloss in Hesych. 1 p . 35 dyvieis 6 •wpor&v Bvp&v earws ftwfibs en
1 It will be noticed that the prayer of the chorus to Poseidon agrees with the narrative of Vergil (Aen. 2. 201) and Hyginus.

S04>0KAE0Y£ Wissowa I 910—913. Miss J. E. Harrison, Themis, p. 406 ff., treats the ayviebs as a fertility-symbol.—dT|i££wv, 'smoking.' —J. joins irvpl with \d/«ret: the hyperbaton presents no difficulty: see n. on Eur. Hel. 719 and Jebb on At. 723. 2 vs. Although most MSS of, Harpocration have o-rciXaypiois, the other sources give ffraXaypotis. Blaydes wished to read oTaXay/to?;, fiapfi&pois evoapUais. J. says: ' The ace. is right: it is cognate to drul^wv (cp. Pherecr. fr. 108, 14 1 174 K. riSurrov arfil^ovra [avar/j.- al.] of meat)—"steaming with

the ooziness of myrrh," i.e. with the gum, called myrrh, distilled from an Arabian tree. Cp. Eur. Ion n 75 Ki.fy9vp.ia,
371 v, os Aiyaiov vpavas rj yXau/cas avefLov

Xcus

Xlfnvas

ev-

i<j>' V1//T7-

8

3 7 1 . 1 Alyaiovs ^x c ' s Bergk, Aiyaiov vt/ieis Fritzsche, Aiyaiov irepi Tucker 2 sq. irpuivbs Scaliger | eiavep.ovs V 4 n> Papabasileios 3 7 1 Ar. Ran. 665 AI. UbcruSov. HaKTwXby...vifn.eiS and for ^Seisi SA. TjXyrjfftv rts • AI. ds Aiyaiov irp&vas f) Horn, a 72 QbpKvvos dvydryp, aXbs drpvyXavnas liiSeu aXbs iv fitvBtaw. The yiroio fieSovroi.—AtyaCov is for Aiyaiov scholiast remarks: trapa TCL liotponXeovs ireXdyom (irbvTov). The ellipse of the (K AaoKbwvros 'Nbo-eiSov...
AAOKOQN as at Sunium etc.: (2) or, surveying the blue expanse of the open sea from the rocks amidst the waves to which he has risen from the depths.'—piSeis, which occurs also in Ant. n 19, is regarded by some as an archaistic re-formation after the substantival niSuy: see Smyth, Gk. J/e/ic Poets, p. 213. (TTo|i
43 ew

£>va%, varip' tx vedv (vaQv Canter) (Spas | ippva\ios, autTtptw and the like: the details are collected by Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 1158. Now eiia.v4jj.ov, on the ordinary view, is either (a) breezy or (b) calm,—without much obvious point. But in Eur. Andr. 749 Xi/x^yaj eirrivt/tovs = sheltered harbours. We might then translate: 'Who holdest sway on lofty crags over the entrance to the blue waters of the sheltered cove.' In any case, I think, Bergk's transposition GTonaTuv
372

[draconum nominal 3 7 2 Servius on Verg. Aen. 2. 204 (speaking of the serpents which attacked Laocoon) horum sane draconum nomina Sophocles in Laocoonte dicit. Nauck discredits this statement altogether, and thinks that it is due to confusion of Sophocles himself with the scholiasts who commented on his text. This attitude, which he supports by a reference to Aesch. fr. 376, Eur. fr. 1016 and other passages, cannot be approved. The names are given by Tzetzes on Lycophr. 344 as Tlbptcis and Xapt/3ota. Serv. on Verg. Aen. 2. 211, quoting as his authority Lysimachus—an Alexandrian writer belonging to the second or

first century B.C.—in the N6<m>i (FHG III 240}, presents them in the disguised form of Curifis and Periboea (curifin et periboeam : Thilo conj. Porcen ofin [S0ie] et Chariboeam). Lycophr. 347 has nal waidofipuTos

Ho p ictws

VT]
referring to the Calydnae. H. points out that the serpent who guarded the apples of the Hesperides is named Ladon by Apoll. Rhod. 4. 1396. C. Keil (Anal. Epigr. 191 n.) adds Glycon, the name of a snake in Lucian Alex. 18. For the significance of these names as bearing on the plot of the play see Introductory Note.

ICXfcQKAEOYI

44

373 AITEAOS vvv 8' iv vukaicTLV Aiveas o rrjs 0eov Trdpea-r', in' tojxatv Ttarip e)^a)v Kepavviov VC&TOV KaTacrTaZpvTa. fivcrcnvov c^apos, KVKKOI 8' dvacrracr' OIK€T5>V ira[ATr\r)d£a, crwoTra^erai Se TTXT^OS OL TTOCTOV S Z ot TTJCTS' ipaxTL Trj<s a.7roiKias 373. 1 Atvelas codd. 2 Kepa.6vi.ov coni. Reiske 3 /XOTOV Plutarchi codd. [ tamen comm.]: ] KwcXeivulg., )/fXif) Reiske [ 5' avao-raa' plerique 4 KVKXOI B [V. codd., , Traytc\7]p[a.v coni. ,ij Blaydes y : ni yqp scnpsi: Se waaav codd. | ira,inr\7j9ia. t Nk Xd Naecke 5sq.
3 7 3 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. i. 48, discussing various accounts of Aeneas' migration from Troy to Italy:

SOKCIS, ot R e i s k e :

SoKei
KOOIVTL dpafiaTi, /xeXXoiSffr/s aklGKevQai rrjs TTAXCUS, ireTroiriKe Toy Alvelav avajKeva£6fj.eirov els rrjv "Jdrjifj Ke\evff8&Ta uir6 rod irarpiis 'AyxLvov Karh TT)V /j.frnxrii' ilv 'AtppoSiTT] iir^(7K7)\pef Kal dirb TUIV vewffrl yevofiimov irepl TOI>S AaoKowvTiSas d vTa. oke&pov TTJS 7r6Xews ff /jp/ov. %x€t d^ *v ctuT^j TOL taf

town Aineia in Macedonia belonging to the sixth century B.C., on which Aeneas is represented carrying his father on his shoulders, with his wife beside him carrying a child in like manner (Baumeister, Denkmaler, fig. 1015). Cf. Apollod. epit. 5. 21 Atvdas Be 'Ayx^"<\v TOV iraTipa /Jaordcras iv£ov. ' Anchises had been struck with lightning for divulging his intercourse with Venus. In the Homeric hymn to Aphrodite, the goddess speaks thus to Anchises (v. 286):

iv ayy£kov (Kiessling for ayyiXq B,

el

SOOKX7JS ph

6 rpayifSoToibs

iv Aao-

di

Kev

^fe/7ri;s

Kal eirei^etu apoi>i

vulgo) Trpoc(j}TT(fj \eybfieva Qpuywv.'

tS5e " ' vvv... &v[i
(Anchises speaks) ex quo me divom pater atque hominum rex \ fulminis adflavit ventis et contigit igniS (J.) Allen and Sikes suggest that the story is late, on the ground that it appears first in Hyginus; 0dpos.' For vthrov Wyttenbach has but Rossbach (in Pauly-Wissowa I 2107) fioTov ('lint') in his text, although he seems to be justified in tracing it to the prefers viirov, which he assigns to Turne- old epic saga. The alternative account that Anchises was blinded by the lightning bus. Bernardakis prints vtirov without mentioning any variant. Weil suggests is ascribed to Theocritus by Servius on flpbTov. It appears that most of Plut.'s Aen. 2. 35. See Wilamowitz, Textgesch. MSS have IIOTOV, the Riccardianus alone d. Bukol. p. 233. viirrov (Nauck,' Paton). vuTou...dpos. Plutarch's ix&pa wo1 Alveas: for the authorities which vqpbv i^eSiSov leaves no doubt that he deal with the departure of Aeneas see understood Sophocles as affirming that the Introductory Note. the robe of Anchises was stained by the 2 f. 4ir' u|itt>v: there is very little discharge from his wound. So the words doubt that this touch, which is explained are taken by Wyttenbach, and by J., who by the allusion of Kepavvlov, goes back quotes for the ace. after KaraaT&fa Phil. to Arctinus. The oldest evidence relating 823 ISpilis yi TOI viv ira.v /caTaordfei Stims, to it appears to be that of a coin of the and E u r . Hec. 241
or play 1 ws yap dpoifiara rpifiiovas evwdets Kal paKia iroiei, TOV S' 'Ayxicrov TA <Xio/j.a (paKos codd. opt.. A i d . ) Ix&pa Tovqpbv e'faSiSov, ' viirov KaraaTafovra fiiaauiov

AAOKOQN

45

KaTio-ratov yivvv. But this view fails to carried all his household, as well as his account for the genitive vdiTou, for which father, on his back. Hense's own no parallel can be adduced. And, if remedy KU/cXe? 5e 7racTCtfi/...and Blaydes's the words mean ' dropping (matter) from KVKkei 5e au/xirda'... fail to remove the his palsied back over his linen robe,' it inelegant repetition of iras. I have subis very odd that the most important word stituted 5' avaffTaff' (i.e. avaaTOLTos ycvo(i'xcS/)a or the like) should be omitted. ^vrj), which gives an appropriate meaning If this line of interpretation is followed, (cf. Eur. Hcc. 494), and might easily have the loss of a verse must be assumed. been corrupted to ii Traaav: the accusative But the assumption is unnecessary, for Trafj.ir\-qdiav was a consequential error. the words can naturally be explained It is impossible to accept Ellendt's view 'letting his linen robe drop over his that KVK\(?means 'secttm volvit, i.e. turba back.' Wyttenbach, who mentions this circumfusus ingreditur.' Papageorgius as an alternative version, calls it 'durior rightly gave the preference to KUKKOI, for metaphora': but cf. Horn. E 734 iriirXov the lexicons will show that KUKXCIP cannot fxep /car^xeueI/ eaedi* iraTpbs ^7r' oOSet, be used for 'to encircle.'—irap.ir\T)9ia Aesch. Ag. 230 KpoKov /3a0as §' is iriSov has been objected to (see cr. n.), as Xiovaa. I am glad to find that the same aira£ elp7]fj.€vov, and because ir\T)8os occurs view was taken by Meineke on Callim. in the next line. But something must h. Dem. 5 JUTJS' a KaTexeiaro x<*'™". be allowed to accident, and TraixifK^dia. W. R. Paton in C. R. xxv 204, adopting is hardly the word to have been introduced fxoTod and reading Kepativiov (coll. Ant. as a gloss. Blaydes compares iroXvir\t]diq. 1139) understands 'staining the fine coat fr. 667 and av5poir\r]dia Aesch. Pers. of Aeneas with the discharge from his 238. See also on fr. 915. rag-bandage.' It may perhaps seem 5 oTJvoiraJeTCU. 'The anapaest in hazardous to assume that Plutarch misthe first foot, in a word of more than understood Sophocles, but I believe that VWTOV and /JLOTOV were old rivals, and three syllables, is rare, though not inthat Plutarch chose the inferior. The correct (cp. O. T. 20 &.yopo,Zai ffaKei). m/j.ir\d£eTai = apos, ' meant to be oriental 704 x&T£Pa Ttba' CLTT' ot'et yeyevrjad' iv TTJ and barbarian. In Aesch. Pers. 128 jSuffiricois iriir\ois are the garb of the irbkei. Eubul. fr. 82, n 192 K. rjtpiiviK.e •wrfKiKov Tifa I o'tevde [itycdos. See also Persian mourners. Ear. Bacch. 821 AI. on Ar. Vtsp. 1428 (p. 425). aretXai vvv dfMpi XP u r ' /3vs TIE. Ti di} r65'; esyvva'iKas e£ dvdpos reXw;' doK£ts Kepavvva raXus. Diphil. fr. 96, II (J.) The latter passage shows that 572 K. deurvei re KaraStis TT&S SoKeis /S(5crcroy was also the delicate wear of AaiiajviKws. The idiom is obviously women: so Aesch. Theb. 1030, Theocr. colloquial, 'you can't think how large,' 2. 73, fr. 439 n. This explanation suffibut we have irui SOKCTS in tragedy also at ciently accounts for 0d/>os, which is not Eur. Hipp. 446, Hec. Ii6o(/. A. 1590 is elsewhere in tragedy applied to male attire, without supposing that it denotes a late forgery). The latter passage in yaXtjvujv TTWS donus Trpou
KVKXOI.

See cr. n.

Nauck and

Dindorf adopted Reiske's KVKK^ (which however Jacoby attributes to B), but Hense rightly objected to a reading which involves a clumsy syllepsis of *?x">". even if it does not seem to assert that Aeneas

6 ' Dind. and Herw. place a comma after airoLKias, to show that 4>pvywv goes with irXijdos. For <J>pi5f = Tpcis, cp. Ai. 1054 (n.)'(.].) Rhythm shows that ipvy&v is governed by o'i.

374 ol TTOVOL yXu/ceis.

irovov

Aesch. Theb. 692 Salfn.av.../i.eTaWaKT6s 3 7 4 Stob. flor. 29. 38 (ill p. 635, 3 Hense) 1 Xo/ponXiovs AaoKooifTos. ' TO- (in a metaphor from a changing wind), Pers. 944 Sai/iwv yap 85' aS fieT&rpoiros yov...y\vKeU.' eir' e/iol (schol. i] TVXV ^era/S^jSXijTai), Though the words are simple enough, Eur. Tro. 101 //.(Ta^aWo/ji^vov Saifiovos their exact intention has puzzled the avtyov, Dinarch. 1. 92 //.erotuvio-ao-Ocu critics. Thus Dobree proposed oi X6701 Tty y\vKels or i] i>.vi\\x<\ yKvKb, doubtless with TVXTJV /cat neraXKal-aoBai. Similar is the intention of Tucker's vvbov, a word the object of producing a closer correnot to be lightly introduced. On the spondence with the well-known line of other hand Hense, who does not alter Euripides (fr. 133) d\X' TjSi TOI awBivra /xe/ivrjaBat vbvav. See also the illustra- the text, evidently approves the meaning tions quoted on Eur. Hel. 665 •fjSi TOI. 'a change of labour is sweet.' Only the context could decide, but I am not satisjidx^oiy Kkieiv. But, if we compare Antisth. ap. Stob. flor. 29. 65 -qSovas fied that irbvov /neTaWaxtevTos cannot TOS nera robs irbrovs SuaKTiov, dXX' obxl express a change from labour to ease. ras irpb TS>V irbvwv, remembering that it Thus Eur. Her. 734 /terajSoXa KO.KSIV was Antisthenes who said fiavelijii fiaWov probably signifies a release from suffering, ij i]a$elriv, the point might appear to be and there is no doubt about the meaning of Eur. fr. 864 iraifa' fi€Ta(3o\as yap that labour brings its own reward with irbvwv ad , and of Soph. fr. 314, 217 it. Aesch. Ag. 798 efiippwv irovos eS jUerdoraffis TTOVUV. Gomperz defends his Te\4tTa. Hence Ellendt's KOTTOV jtieraXconjecture 01 7601 for ol vbvoi by the Xax^Tos and Meineke's fibx^ov 6" diroXHomeric yoifi tppeva ripironai and yKvicbv Aax^^ros. H. would have agreed with Meineke as against Ellendt on the ground ifiepov (Spire 76010, and other passages in that Tripoli, KOTTOV or /ibxBov requires a tragedy; but this is less attractive, as the pleasure of weeping does not depend verb meaning to abate, cease; whereas on the cessation of suffering. Stadt/leraWaoaeiv is to shift, change, alter. mueller's oi TOTOI y\vneU is certainly to He accordingly approved irbr/j.ov /iera\\ax6tvTos (Nauck had conjectured TST/JIOV be rejected. HeTaf}\ri8£i>Tos), comparing fr. 871. 2,

375 yo.p 375

TOV TrapeXdovros Xoyos.

Stob. flor. 29. 37 (ill p. 635,

1 Hense) 2O0OKX^OUS AUO/COWI/TOS (SO S.:

MA omit the extract). ' /J.6x0ou...\6yos.' Meineke reads irovov for nbxBov, connecting this with the last fr. (see n.). Similarly Holzner conjectured i)8vs for ovdtis. Dindorf also concludes that the two lines are to be read together. But in fact they do not fit each other: here the point is that no sooner is a sorrow past than it js forgotten. Cf. Pind. Isth. 8. 11 aW t/xoi 5u/xa /xkv wapoLxofievov Kaprepav eVouo-e fiApi/wav.— ouSels...\o70s, ' no account is taken of...,' is a phrase which Herodotus employs more than once: see 7. 223 r/v di X670S otfSeis

TOV airoWvfjifrov, 8. 102 MapSoptou 5e TJV ri TriOy X670S oiSeis ylyverat, 9. 80. Cf. Aesch. Prom. 247 pporuiv Si T&V ra\aiirihpuv \6yov \ OIIK io~Xfv oibtv' (see Blomfield in loc), Eur. fr. 94 TSIV yap

Svvao-Tuv irXeto-Tos h irb\u X670S, Med. 541 OVK av y\v X670J aiOev—an example which shows that it is sometimes difficult to separate this meaning from that of speech, reputation (I.T. 517). Sophocles has also obx av wpialin)v obSevos \byov pporbv Kre. Ai. 477, and fir)
AAOKOQN— AAPIZAIOI

47

376 avr)\6 KMTpai 376

Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 136, 28

K6WVTI. Cf. Hesych. 1 p. 199 di
self-laceration of female mourners. It is possible, however, that the meaning is simply ' I am wounded,' for which cf. Rhes. 796 fjadelav

&\oKa.Tpaijp.a.Tos\af}
So probably also Eur. Her. 164 n&vTiBtpKerai j dopbs rax^o-v a\oKa, T&£(.V e/Xj3e/3ws,

which Wilamowitz interprets as a swiftlymoving crop of spears.

377 377

Hesych. II p. 432 KarapdKTijs a bird. Cf. [Arist.] mir. ausc. 79: the Diomedean birds, if barbarians land in

(Ka.Tappa.KTris Musurus)- 6X*T6S, pud£. KOI •6 deris. 2o<poK\rjs AO.OK6IM>TI. (\aoK6orTi c o d . ) . Kal ras apirvias iv Qii/eT (fr. 714).

their island, avi-wTaadai teal alojpoufjievovs Karapdaa'etc aurovs eis r a s Ke(pa\as avrCiv.

The eagle received this name from its downward swoop as a bird of prey. The sea-bird specifically so called is accordingly described by Arist. h. an. 9. 12.

These birds were called cataractae by some authorities: Plin. h. n. 10. 126.

615* 28 6 5e Ka.TappaKT7]s ffi fiev irepl &a\aTTav, 6rav 5^ KOL8T} eavTov et's TO fiaOti, /j.4veL xpbvov OVK eXdrrova 7) ovov

in describing him as aiviv KarappaKTTJpa

Lycophron, who has nlpKov KarappaKTifpos

(169), compares Paris to a bird of prey (539). Athen. 393 B: if jackdaws see their own reflection in a bowl of oil, oi

(TT&vTes OLVTLIV Ziri TO x e ^ o s /cat /cara/3\eir\4dpov SU\6OL Tts. Also the verb rarapd
AAPIZAIOI There can be no reasonable doubt that the subject of this play was the final issue of the story of Acrisius and Danae. According to Pherecydes in schol. Ap. Rhod. 4. 1090 (FHG 1 76), Perseus, leaving Dictys as sovereign of all the Seriphians who were not destroyed by the Gorgon's head, returned to Argos with his wife and mother. But Acrisius was no longer there; for, in fear of the oracle that he would be slain by his daughter's son, he had withdrawn to the Pelasgian town of Larisa. Perseus followed him there, made himself known to his grandfather, and persuaded him to accompany him to Argos. But before his departure Perseus was a competitor in a local athletic contest which included quoit-throwing. It so happened that the discus thrown by Perseus, rebounding after its fall, wounded the foot of Acrisius, who sickened and died at Larisa. This plot is clearly indicated by frs. 378 and 379, and from the former it appears

48

IO*OKAEOYI

that Acrisius himself gave the games,—probably in honour of the reconciliation with his grandson. The account in Apollod. 2. 47, which agrees almost word for word with Zenob. I. 41, is much shorter, but states that the games were held by Teutamidas, the king of Larisa, on the occasion of his father's funeral, and that Perseus came to Larisa with the express object of contending. On the other hand, Pausan. 2. 16. 2 says that Perseus came to Larisa because he wished to see his mother's father, and ' to show him kindness by word and deed.' He makes no reference to the games, but merely states that Perseus, in the pride of youth, rejoicing at the discovery of the discus, gave a public display of his skill. Apollodorus speaks of the contest as the pentathlon, but Pherecydes goes out of his way to deny that the pentathlon had then been established. A late variation of the story is given by Hygin. 63, in which the scene is transferred from Larisa to Seriphus, on the occasion of the funeral games held after the death of Polydectes. The discus was carried out of its proper direction by the wind, and broke the head of Acrisius. The similarity of the circumstances to the Amyclean legend of Hyacinthus and Apollo should be observed: see Eur. Hel. 1469 ff. (n.). 378 irokvv 8' dycava udy^evov KTjpvcrcreTa.1, yaXKtqXaTowi X e ^ r a s e/cri^ets epeii>, KCU KolXa xpva-oKokXa KOI iravdpyvpa i ' et? dpid/xov e^rjKOvra Sis. 378. ^

1 iriy^tvov Schneider et Schweighauser: irdy^eva codd., iray^evel Kaibel, Casaubon, ir&yl-ev' dvaK-qpiaaeTat. Bothe

3 7 8 Athen. 466 B 6 le Tapa 2o0oK\CI iv rots Aapicrafois 'AKpiaios Kal avrbs eKTui/xara ttaa irXetara etx*vi us
that this is only a special application, suggested by the context, of the essential subjectivity which belongs to the middle voice. See the excellent account given by E. S. Thompson on Plat. Men. 93 D. The partiality of Sophocles for the middle voice is well known: parallel cases are O. T. 556 Trtfifavdai, Phil. 944 4>fya', of the urn con-

AAPIIAIOI

49

taining the supposed ashes of Orestes.— I35o 23 i-\a(3ev €K TGIV ivbvrwv lep&p e'pei.v, to win = tj>ipea6au So El. 692 Siros ivrpi KOIXOS &pyvpos...l86vTes 8c 01 TOVTOJII eveyKuv iravra rainviiaa, 0. C. 6, ffTpariuTai Kai voiliaavres airavTa etvai 0. T. 590, 1190, Ant. 464 KtpSos (pipei, Hpyvpov r a Aybfieva. Cf. Theopomp. At. 436 e0KXeiai> (pipuv. (FHG I 298) ap. [Longin.] de sublim. 43. 2 KOI\OS apyvpos KOX xP""bs diretpyaS 6 K0i\05 TT&[JL7ro\vS. produced by the chasing of the baser 4 «is dpi0(jiov IjjtJKovTa Sis: 'twice metal are overlaid with gold (or silver); sixty in number,' not ' to the number (of) and helps here to distinguish the cups twice sixty.' Cf. Hdt. 7. 60 6nov fiaxcn-m with gold ornamentation from those which napelx0" TMJ
379 Aapicra 379

pr\Tr)f> Trpoa-yovaiv

Adpurffa cod. ] TltkaayiSuiv Diels: ireKaayiSav cod., I\.ekanyi.Swv Nicole

redundant shows that he understood the 3 7 9 Schol. Gen. Horn. * 319 nvh ypaov 5i5o ~d aXoy ffx^pddos, eirei meaning to be ' (our) Pelasgian ancestors.' iivtpopi(i)v iv QpQicL ' njfj.fios virb K^/iofs 5^ fpT]di irepiffoop TO
Trap' 'Ou-fipif ' 7ata (peptafiios' (see Allen Blaydes irpoiraTopwi* or dvyaripuiv HekaayucGiv, but none of these guesses is satisand Sikes, Homeric Hymns, p. 1). Kai factory. It is perhaps possible that 2o<poi<\iis kv dpxv AapLcraaiitjv 'Adptcr
380 Kcu fMOL rp'nov

piTTTOVTi AajTieus

Trpocryjifiev "EXaro? iv

S

avrjp

^

380. 2 "EXaros Bergk: HXa.os cod. (Iiteram extritam T esse Montfaucon censebat), 4\a
38O S t e p h . Byz. p . 257, 4 AUITLOV, TTAXIS 8eff
381 TW TOV

avrov <us

3 8 1 Stob.flor. 125. 11 (iv p. 1139, 6 Hense) 2o0o/cX^oi>s Aapitrtraltav. '^T/5^ ...davoi/icnoi'.' It has generally been thought that something is wrong with the text, which seems to give the opposite of the sense required. Hence Gesner altered }a\Si to XpT) 5^, which Dindorf, Wagner and others adopt, and Tyrwhitt substituted iiravxeiv for cirapKEiv. Both are satisfactory in point of meaning,—for the latter we might compare Horn. % 4 1 2 oi>x oatTj KTV.p.tvoi<jLV 4TT' d.vdpd e{>xeT&~

aadai.; but it does not seem likely that XP"h w a s corrupted to fMj—, or that so good a word as eirapKeiv arose by accident. It is possible, as Ellendt and Campbell contend, that the context would have cleared up the obscurity; but the words seem to be part of a direct admonition, and experiment will

show that it is not easy satisfactorily to fill the gap. For the general sentiment implied in the text as it stands cf. Eur. Phoen. T32O rots yap davovvi xp^] T6V oi redvr)KbTO. | n/ids 8id6i>Ta XSOPLOI/ eS
debv. The spirit of the precept is by no means that of 'doing unto others as we would they should do unto us.' It is merely another particular application of the maxim dvrjTa (ppovelv XPV (see on fr. 590), which itself illustrates the Greek devotion to moderation and self-restraint (fiijdiv fi7ac). Similarly in El. n y i SVTITOO TriipvKas iraTpbs, '"BXinrpa, <j>pbvet, I BVTITOS S' 'OpiiTTris' ware /j.ri \iav

o-Teve, i.e. don't forget the limitations imposed upon humanity, which require you to suffer, Orestes to die. Holzner defended the text by quoting Eur. Hel. V KO.T8O.V6VTI

AAPIIAIOl—AHMNIAI 382 (j>vyelv.

KOLV Tvpavvfi

3 8 2 jcai' Tupavvri scripsi: Kai Ttjpavvt Hesych., Kai rtipavvov Brunck | iwei^er Nauck: iyylfcrcu Hesych., efli'ferai Meineke, i(f>liTai. Grotius, e7rei/xeT<" Semenow exifTjrei R. Ellis 3 8 2 Hesych. IV p. 336 ws...2o0oXTJS Sk Aapuximiois avri TOD \tav. 'us... y The restoration of this fragment is a hopeless quest, unless a new edition of Hesychius should yield fresh material. At present, as Nauck says, ' ita editur, de codicis scriptura non constat.' The grammatical explanation \iav is of no assistance, being merely a stock gloss of worthless character: see Suid. s.v. us, who quotes fr. 960 in illustration of the same rendering. Similarly the schol. on At. 39 TO us avrl rod aXijffws. There is no value in such random guesses as

F. W. Schmidt's tbs TOV Tvpuvvov (or cifs vyetv, or Blaydes's us rty TvpavviS' evxerai iras ris The sense obtained by the vulg. us Kai rvpavvov 7r5s {(plerai tpvyeiv and similar attempts is unsatisfactory: as a general statement it is untrue or incomplete, and if particularized bears no relation to what is known of the plot. My suggestion implies that the words refer to the withdrawal of Acrisius to Larisa: ' before such a danger, everyone—even a king— would seek to fly.' For the gnomic future see Gildersleeve, § 258.

383 383

Steph. Byz. p. 381, 14 Kpaveia,

Xupiov ' A.iAfipa.KLorrwv...rb iOvucbv KpareidT17S ws MaXeioTijs {tiapeLarris codd.), UK (jyqal XoOK\ijs Aapwaiois (Xapicroios codd.).

Craneia was a hill-fortress in the territory of Ambracia; and the range of hills on the N. of the town was called

by the same name (Bursian, Geogr. 1 34). Ambracia was a colony of Corinth, so that there may be a connexion with the Corinthian Craneum, for which see Frazer, Pausan. in p. 18. The man from Craneia was probably a competitor at the games.

AHMNIAI The arrival of the Argonauts at Lemnos was the first recorded incident in their voyage. They found it occupied only by women, under the rule of Hypsipyle, the daughter of Thoas. The Lemnian women had neglected the worship of Aphrodite, who in consequence made them offensive to their husbands, so that they were abandoned in favour of Thracian concubines brought over from the mainland. The wives in revenge massacred their husbands and fathers,—all except Hypsipyle, who saved the life of her father Thoas. When the Argonauts landed, they formed alliances with the women; and Hypsipyle bore to Jason two sons, Euneus (Hom. H 468) and another known either as Nebrophonus 4—2

52

I0<J>0KAE0Y2

(Apollod.), Deipylus (Hygin.), or Thoas (A. P. 3. 10). Such is the brief narrative of Apollodorus (1. H4f.), to which Asclepiades (FHG III 303) adds nothing. The title might suggest that the central motive of the play was the notorious crime committed by the women: cf. Aesch. Cho. 629 Kaicwv Be irpecrfteveTai TO Adfiviov Xoya>. But schol.

Apoll. Rhod. 1. 769 shows that both the present play and the Hypsipyle of Aeschylus were concerned rather with the landing of the Argonauts and its consequences: ore Be ifiiyrjcrav 01 'Apyovavrai rats Ar)/j,viai<;, 'HpoBcopos Icrropei iv TO£? 'ApyovavTLfcois (FUG II 38). Ala-^v\o<; Be iv 'T-^nrvXr) (p. 79 N.) iv OTTXOK; (jyrjcrlv avTa<> i"ireX0ovot? direipyeiv, f^eXP1 Xafielv opKov Trap avrmv a.Tr6j3avTa<; fiiyijcreo'&ai avTals. %o<poicXfjs Be iv rat? ArjfivLaK KOX fiaxw lo'XvP^LV O^TOV? avvd^rai,

(j)7ja-lv. The statement of Aeschylus that the women armed themselves and opposed the landing of the Argonauts agrees with Apoll. Rhod. I. 635 Brjia Teu^ea Bvaai 69 alytaXov irpor) 8' d/xa rfjai ®oavTia<; "TtyiirvXeia | hvv ivl Tev^fcrf

So the habits of the women are described: TJJ6pov<; re f^dai dpovpas \ prjurepov irdarjcriv 'AOrjvalrjs ireXev epycov

(ib. 627ff.,with which we should probably compare fr. 387). The storm attested for Aeschylus and the battle-scene of Sophocles are described with his usual elaboration by Statius (Theb. 5. 376—397). But the most important source for the whole incident is Apollonius, who tones down the harsher features of the story agreeably to the taste of the Alexandrian epoch (1. 609—909). The women appear in armour, but Aethalides is sent to make terms, which are immediately granted. Then Polyxo, the aged nurse of Hypsipyle, recommends that the strangers be invited to settle in the island, in order that the women may not lack protection in the days to come. Iphinoe is ordered to ask Jason to enter the city. At his interview with Hypsipyle, she conceals the murder of the men, representing that they were expelled by the women and are living in Thrace. Subsequently all the Argonauts were welcomed within the walls, except Heracles, who remained by the ship. After a delay of several days1, Heracles rebuked them for their indolence; the Argonauts at once made ready for departure ; and Hypsipyle and Jason exchanged parting speeches, mournfully acquiescing in the destiny which forced them to separate. Hyginus (fab. 15) takes from Apollonius the proposal of Polyxo, and also mentions Iphinoe, who is described 1 The stay lasted two years according to Ovid (Her. 6. 56), one year according to Statius (Thet. 5. 460), and four months according to Valerius Flaccus (2. 367).

AHMNIAI

53

as custos portae and announces to Hypsipyle the arrival of the Argonauts. Welcker, who assumes that the last-mentioned detail is taken from Sophocles, assigns frs. 385 and 386 to a speech of Iphinoe, and thinks that fr. 389 refers to her watch. He justly observes that there is nothing tragic in Apollonius' account1, and seeks to avoid the consequent difficulty by emphasizing the importance of the battle as the principal incident of the play. This is hardly satisfactory; for the battle cannot have been much more than a skirmish, even when we give full weight to the scholiast's epithet. The chief interest of the subject for Sophocles must have been the opportunity which it offered for delineating the character of a woman confronted with such exceptional difficulties. The climax of the action must surely have been the departure of Jason—less easily effected, we may surmise, than in Apollonius; and the play may have ended with the selling of Hypsipyle into slavery after the discovery that Thoas was still alive (Apollod. 3. 65). In that case the unity of time would require that the landing and the battle were merely referred to as events that had happened efa> TOV Spd/xaro*;.

An isolated reference in Stephanus (fr. 386) implies that a revised edition of the play was published.

384 d) Arj/Ave Xpvcr^s T ay^LTep/Jioves Trdyot 3 8 4 Steph. Byz. p. 696, 16 XptJjnj, fiapvrSvws, ij iro\is rou 'AirdWoivos iyyvs A-qiAvov. 2oon\i]S Arifiviats 'w...Trdyoi.' Stephanus, who errs in confusing the Lemnian Chryse with Chrysa in the Troad (see on fr. 40), makes a further blunder in describing it as ir6\is rod 'A-rroWwvos, a description probably intended for the other Chryse (Hesych. ill p. 54 s.v. AVKOXOV). Chryse was a small island to the E. of Lemnos, and the scene of the sacrifice at which Philoctetes was bitten by the serpent guarding the shrine of the nymph Chryse or, according to others, of the goddess Athena worshipped under this name (Phil. 194,1326). Thence he was conveyed to Lemnos and abandoned (ib. 270). Before the time of Pausanias (8. 33. 4) it had been overwhelmed by an inundation, and dis1

appeared beneath the sea. The date of its destruction must have been subsequent to the third Mithridatic war, since it is alluded to, though not named,in Appian's account of a sea-fight of Lucullus (App. Mithr. 77). The Admiralty chart shows an extensive sand-bank immediately to the E. of Lemnos, and it has recently been reported that ancient ruins have been observed on the sea-bottom.—According to a tradition mentioned by Philostr. iun. imag. 18. 2, the altar of Chryse was erected by Jason on his voyage to Colchis. This is confirmed by Doriades (A. P. 15. 26, 5), who calls Jason Xpitras alms. Whether Sophocles introduced the name in that connexion cannot be determined.—Blaydes conj. ayxirip/xovoi.

Hermann, Elem. Metr. p. 120, conjectured that the A^/j.viai was a satyr-play.

2O0OKAEOYZ

54

385 [/caraXoyos TWV ' 385 Schol. Find. Pyth. 4. 303 iravras 2O0OKXTJS ev ra?s Arj/xvidfft r y Spdfian KaTa\£yei TOVS els rb 'Kpyqov eiaeXdSrras anacpos, /rat 6 A&rx^Xos iv Kaj3fipo« (p. 31 N.). As the statement covers more than the contents of fr. 386, it has been printed separately. The extant lists of Argonauts are those given by Pind. Pyth. 4, Apoll.

Rhod. adinit. (reproduced with variations by Hygin. fab., 14, Val. Flacc. 1 352-486, Tzetz. Lye. 175), Apollod. 1. m f f . , Diod. 4. 41. There is evidence that similar lists were recorded by Pherecydes (FUG 1 87), Herodorus {FHG 11 37 f.), Cleon (schol. Ap. Rh. 1. 77), and possibly by Hesiod (schol. Ap. Rh. 1. 45).

386 s T "AS/U^TOS 17S' o Aomeus Kopcovos 386

Steph. Byz. p. 257, 5

The son of Coronus is mentioned in the

7r6Xis Oe(TOK\9I% Aapwaiois (fr. 380)...KOX iv Ar/- was the son of Caeneus, who was a distinguished leader of the Lapithae in fjLViais irpoTe'pat.s '$epi]Ttdr]s...K6p<jWos.'

No doubt these lines occurred in the list of Argonauts. According to Pind. Pyth. 4. 125 f. Admetus and Melampus, who were Jason's cousins, accompanied their fathers Pheres and Amythaon. Thus his share in the expedition was an early adventure of Admetus. Pheres is not mentioned in the other lists.—i]8e, common in Aeschylus, occurs twice in Sophocles (cf. fr. 549), and twice in Euripides {Her. 30, Hec. 323). Burges conj. rjv xw.—Aomeis: see on fr. 380.—

their fight with the Centaurs (Ap. Rh. 1. 57—64). The Lapithae were the heroic ancestors of the Thessalian nobility, and the famous battle is the echo of some prehistoric resettlement of Thessaly. Coronus, as king of the Lapithae near Mt Olympus, afterwards came into conflict with the Dorians of Hestiaeotis; but Heracles came to the assistance of the latter and slew Coronus (Diod. 4. 37, Apollod. 2. 154).

387 airXarov 387

awXarov Bergk: airXaoTov codd.

3 8 7 Phot. p. 153, 3 ed. Reitz. I p. 22i AtyfipXriTov (d|ii|3Xi7TOJ' c o d . : (=Bekk. anecd. p. 413, 14 and Etym. corr. Musurus) 8 fiijSevl awavrav (airavrq. M. cod. Voss. p. 327c Gaisf.) a^i/j.^\rpTJ cod.: corr. Nauck) Svvar6v, ^ aavv&vTi]X^ k l Welcker's suggestion that these words om. Etym. M.).' Eustath. Od. p. 1405, were spoken of Hypsipyle by Polyxo is 57 d{!5/i/3Xi)Tos...!J5 oiK iuTW awavTrjT)ffiv ' &ir\a' (sic). T h e words gadocio addressed by the Chorus to their a.ir\a<XTov &tynf$\y)TOv are also recorded opponents. Necessity had made the without the name of the poet or the Lemnian women formidable adversaries : play in Cramer, anecd. Par. IV p. 115, 4. Ap. Rhod. 1. 627 Tjjffi 5e @OVK6\U>.1 re The name of the play is given by Hesych. fiQ ^ " * T e Svvetv | r e i i ^ e d , a f o r e fx^devl

airavrriaai.

S

X

J

AHMNIAI

55

nvpo
388 ai/ro Seifet Tovpyov ws iyco cra^ais 388

388

T&X' airb Meineke : raxv 5' airb codd. | fort. olb" eya

Schol. Plat. Hipp. mat. 288 B have observed the ways of copyists.—

irapoip.ia, avrb dei^et, itri rCiv dinurovvrt^v airi SE(£EI is the common phrase (Plat. TL /AT; yev£(TdaL.../jLe'[ju>r]Tai de auTTjs KOLTheael. 200 E, Hipp. mai. 288 B) for

which ai)ro cTijfiavet (Eur. Phoen. 623, Bacch. 976), aim) 5i)XciSi$ Bulges; iis Xiio-ei. (3) rdxa. is usually glossed by ^X€t' <7'ct0LtJs Herwerden; OJS £XW* , ffa0u)s Meineke. Hense was justified in observing that the raxu indicated above prevails generally in examples of airb dei^ei show that it classical Greek, raxu came to be used should not be joined with cra^tDs. in place of rdxa. at a later date. The intrusion of 5' will not surprise those who 2 }

s OUTOJS '

' Taxv

5'

389 opav VKTOS dojpi. F o r t h e use of the 3 8 9 Hesych. I p . 296 acraKiriKrov cupaf. rd yap KO\ trumpet ininthe theheroic heroicage agesee seeon onEur. Eur. b ffxeaovvKTiov. eo"ir£pa$ tp yp i trumpet p A^Qn*,, A^-n\/tri}-nii V/i^>ni-\*le Anintinie Phnrvi _ 1377, T 2*77. Jebb TpKh on on Ai. T_ PPollux o l 111 V Phoen. Ai.r 17. SpSpov effa\iri£ov. XotpotcKrjs Ar//j.viais. (4. 86) mentions among the p.epy] TOO Bekk. anecd. p . 450, 16 aeaKinyKTov wpav

TO neaoviKTiov.

oiirai 2O0O/CXT;S.

The phrase is parallel to the more com-

woXe/iiffTTiplov aaXiriy/iaTOS both the e|op[n}TLKOV or reveille, a n d t h e avairavGT'qpi.ov

56

IOOKAEOYI

as TA Ka.Tafcvyi/6iTv M^>9tyii.a. In At. times (Meisterhans3, p. 84). The state289 ff. Tecmessa enquires of Aias, ri ment of L. & S. to the contrary is TIJPS ...d0op/i?s ireipav oSre TOV KXIW | erroneous; and of the older authorities a&Xwiyyos; dWh vvv ye was eiijei L. Dindorf's view (in Steph. Thes.) has
MANTEIZ H TTOAYIAOI

The story of Polyidus and Glaucus is related most fully by Hyginus {fab. 136) and Apollodorus (3. 17—20). Glaucus, son of Minos and Pasiphae, when a child, fell into a large vessel full of honey, and perished1. Minos did not know what had become of him, and consulted the oracle of Apollo (or, according to Apollodorus, the Curetes). The response was as follows2. Minos had in his herds a wondrous cow, a prodigy which changed its colour thrice a day, being in turn white, red, and black. Whoever, said the oracle, could find the most appropriate object of comparison to the marvel, would also be able to give back the child alive to his father. The soothsayers of Crete were called together, but failed to solve the puzzle. Then a foreign diviner from Argos, Polyidus son of Coeranus, successfully accomplished the task by comparing the cow to a mulberry, white in the bud, then red, and finally black. Polyidus was then required by Minos to find Glaucus. The seer had recourse to augury, and at last discovered the dead child3. But, when he brought the body to Minos, the latter demanded that Polyidus should restore Glaucus to life. As the seer declared this to be impossible, Minos resolved to bury him alive in the same tomb with the corpse of the boy. Polyidus was accordingly entombed ; but in the vault itself he found a way of deliverance. A snake came to the dead body, and Polyidus killed it with a stone4. Presently he saw another snake come, and cover the dead snake with a particular grass. Then the dead snake came to life. So Polyidus brought the same 1 For the association of iri'floi with death see Miss Harrison, Proleg. p. 38, Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 8165. 2 The answer is merely a riddle propounded as a test of intelligence, like the aXviyfia. of the Sphinx (0. T. 393). 3 For the details see on fr. 396. Apollodorus merely says that the discovery of the child's body was effected Bid TWOS /iavrdas. 4 According to Hyginus, with a sword, which Minos had ordered to be placed in the vault.

AHMNIAI—MANTEIZ

57

grass to the dead child, and resuscitated him. Minos, informed by a passer-by who heard sounds in the tomb, caused it to be opened, and having his son restored to him, sent back Polyidus, with many rewards, to Argos. Apollodorus adds that even so Minos would not allow Polyidus to depart until he had imparted the secret of his craft to Glaucus. Polyidus consented, but at the moment of his departure caused Glaucus to spit into his mouth; the result was that by so doing 1he forgot the art of divination which he had recently acquired . The main features of the story are summarized with a rationalistic explanation by Palaephat. 27. From this legend arose the proverb r\av/co<; TTLCOV fj-eXc dvecrr-r] recorded by Apostol. 5. 48. No doubt Phamenus mentioned in fr. 392 was one of the prophets who failed where Polyidus succeeded. Fr. 394 perhaps refers to their attempts to identify the portent by divination Si i/xTTvpwv, just as fr. 396 seems to refer to the augury of Polyidus. It will be shown in the notes that Welcker was hardly right in interpreting fr. 393 of the restoration of Glaucus to life, or fr. 399 of his corpse as bringing a curse on Polyidus. He also regards fr. 398 as coming from a messenger's speech describing a sacrifice made when Polyidus and Glaucus were entombed. But the details of the sacrifice do not suit a funeral rite: they are rather of a joyful, if primitive, character. It is more likely that the reference is to a festival, on the occasion of which Glaucus accidentally lost his life. It should be pointed out in regard to the title of the play that there are seven references to a play entitled MdvTeis, and three to a Polyidus. Frs. 390 and 391 prove that Polyidus was mentioned more than once in the MavTea. Fr. 395, first attributed to this play by Bergk, shows that Sophocles treated the story of Glaucus. It is a natural, if not an inevitable deduction from these premisses that the play of Sophocles bore the alternative titles Mai'Tw? rj Ilo\vi8o<>. The chorus then consisted of fiavreis,—assistants of Polyidus, or perhaps Curetes, as Welcker thought. The Kpfja-aai of Aeschylus dealt with the same subject: see note on fr. 395. For the IIoXwSo? of Euripides, of which many fragments survive, including the famous fr. 638, see Nauck p. 558. 1 For the curious belief that the demonic influence could be expelled by spitting see Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 8873.

58

I04>0KAE0YI 390 6pa> TTpoyeipov HoXvuSov TOV 39O

irpb xetpuii/ (irpoxelpav M) Etym. M. \ iroXviS™ M

3 9 0 Etym. Paris, post Etym. Gud. Sturz. Cf. Etym. M. p. 681, 25 IloXidp. 1011 (p. 1921 B Gaisf., previously pubSos...e'v aXXois Si Sid. TOV I avveo~Ta.XiJ.evov, lished in Valckenaer, diatr. p. 200) us Traph Zo0o/c\« '6p&.,.fidvTeios,' Kai = Cyrill. ap. Cramer, anecd. Paris. IV iraXiv 6 airbs (b avrbs om. F) ' OVK kdTiv p. 188, 29 IIoXi5i5os* OVTOJ Kai 'ATOXX&VIOS el /J.TJ HoXviStp Tip KOipavtp.' Xotpo/3ocfKos. 6 TOV' Apxipiov (the author of the Homeric The Homeric form IloXtirSos (B 148, lexicon: fl. towards the end of the first N 663 yv dt TLS Euxrfvap IloXviSov century A.D.). Kai fan, (priei, iroXviSfiuv, ixavrios vl6s) is deduced by Wackernagel fiavTis dvei (1 508 K.: virb be shortened in Attic: cf.8tv(a ( = 0ivfio). 'ApiiX6fecos (fl. early in the first cent. confusion, is entirely late. See Smyth, A.D.). Kai 2o<poKXrjs S' ev Mavreai avviIonic Dialect, p. 187, and A. J. P VI GTeiXev 'bpw...iidvTeios' Kai vdXa> 'OVK 440, who however does not accept isTw el firi TloXvlSiji (HoXvlSriv Bekk.) Wackernagel's argument. Fick in B.B. Tip Koipdvov.' The extract is badly corxxvi 315 compares for the name the rupted in Etym. Gud. p. 474, 27 ed. German 'Doktor Allwissend.'

391 OVK eo~TLv et ju.77 UoXviSo) TOJ

Koipdvov

3 9 1 ToXviSwv Cyrill., iroXviSrjv Etym. Gud. et Paris. \ Tip Koipdvip Etym. TSI Koinvdxov vel T Kouvdvov codd. Gaisf. {Koipdvov agnovit Welcker) 3 9 1 See on fr. 390. Pherecydes also mentioned Coeranus as the father of Polyidus (FHG IV 638 A). The same genealogy is recorded by Pausan. 1. 43. fl, Apollod. 3. 18, Hygin. fab. 128, 136. In Pind. 01. 13. 75 Polyidus is described by the patronymic KoipavlSas. The

Paris.,

father's name perhaps indicates the association of Polyidus with Crete; for Coeranus is a Cretan in Horn. P 611. So Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 122. Perhaps the sense was, 'the quest is impossible for any save Polyidus.'

392 TTCU<;

3 9 2 £av6as cod. teste Egenolff: foutfos vulgo, |ac0ds Bergk, Iweros Lehrs, %dvBt\'i $a/j.evbs Kai Tetpealov legendum coni. Nauck | (pdfievos cod. 392 Herodian irepl ixov. Xe|. p. 8, 35 &a/iev6s. SO^OKX^S Mdi'rfO'i (iiavreoai. cod.). 'facflds.-.Trais.' Egenolff (Rhein. Mas. xxxv 100) reported that the reading of the MS, which had previously been assumed to be |oi/06s, is actually £av$ds. This makes all the more probable Nauck's ingenious conjecture (see cr. n.), which is based on schol. Eur. Phoen. 834 IlelaavSpos (see

p. x v u i of my ed.) Itrropei 8TI SdvSr) ya/n)$e1ffa Teipeffia iirolriae iraiSas riairapas, Qajxevbv QepeKiSrjv XX&pw Mavrdi. Though the exact wording may be doubtful, the coincidence of the name is too remarkable to be the result of accident.—4>a|j.evos : for the accentuation of these names see Chandler, § 302. They retain the original accent of the participle: Brugmann, Comf. Gr. I 542 E. tr.

MANTEII

59

393

393 Cramer, anecd. Oxon. I p . 226, 8 /cXetu),fi7re/>ol "Ioji/es K\TJU 5id TOU 77 Kal QovKvSidyjs KCLI Tpa.yi.Kol. Kal 2o0o/cX^s ev MdvT£ffi 'ipvxTJs...inj\riv.' o< KW/UKOI Se 5tct Si(p66yyov.

(xhricTixai), which some editors print in Ar. Vesp. 198, has very little claim to consideration: see Rutherford, New Phrynichus, p. 206, and for Ionic Smyth, p. 250. Cramer edited KeK\itr/i£vr)v but Lud- For the metaphor ' to open the closed wich (AVz. Mus, x x x v n 446, Aristarch. gate of the soul' cf. Ant. 'joy 6Vris yap II p. 656) reports that the MS has xe/cX^afirbs r} ippoveiv f/.6vos SoKei, 7} y\Gxr regard to Attic generally there is less JKCWTOS I T6 aTijdos SieXoj/T1, iireiTa rhv agreement. Cobet, V. L. p. ipo, revovv I iffi56vTa, K~KTJUavra ivahiv, \ jected tCktlw and its derivatives everydvdpa
394 ra<; 394

/xaWoSeras AM : n-aWoSerets B, fiaWoSerov! Valckenaer

394 Schol. E u r . Phoen. 12=6 T^S explained: see my ed. of the Phoenissae at p. 218.—|io\XoSeTos should not be Kia-reas TO aTbfia ipiw SeanovvTes iweTichanged to /xaXXoSeTous, as compound deaav Tip irvpl Kal kTqpovv TTUJS payr/aeTaL Ka.i 7rov Tb ovpov CLKOVTIGCI. SO0O/CX^? iv

MTc
adjectives in epic and lyric poetry are frequently of three terminations : cf. EL

1239 dS/j.T]Tav, Ant. 134 avTtTijira (with J . ' s n . ) , Aesch. Cho. (s9>ira.vapKiTa%, Eum. 792 5wro((TTa, Pers. 599 irepiKkioTa, Theb.

105 ev
6o

ZOOKAEOYS

395 p fiev oifjrj XevKOV OVBOVVTCL cnayyv, eiretra oivi£avTa. yoyyvXov /xopov, eiretra yfjpas Xafi^dvei cr' Klyvimov. 3 9 5 . 1 fiiv om. Bekk. anecd., Phot. | toBovvra om. Eustath. Phot., Bekk. anecd., arpoyyffKov Eust. 3 Xapfjavei ais Tov..,AiytiTTTiov.' a-qfiaivet Se... (om. o-Tj/miVei Se Bekk. anecd.). Athen. 51 D yap i^aiBoua' eKiipiruxrev CT6.XVV I &TV* fj.6pa 5£ ra GVKafuva... SO^OKXTJS ' irpwrov... (&Tjj comes to maturity after the sproutixbpov' (vv. 1, 2). Eustath. //. p. 835, 9 ing of iippis). also quotes the first two lines in support 2 M. Schmidt refers to this passage of his statement that fibpos occurs of the the glosses of Hesychius I p. 439 7<>77iiXoi'i fruit beside the neuter fxbpov. (TTpoyyuXoVj GKlvqpbv, and yoyywv' fiwpds. Bergk was the first to see that this —4>
396 TOUS

yXafivpovs Kara (f>op/3dv

3 9 6 Schol. Ar. Ran. 588 yX6,fiwv in a different order and partly mutilated: 0 %xwv X'qfias, 6 a.K6.6apros \irapbaov e"pd>yXafiav. 6 XIJ/JLWV TOI>S <500aX/tous Kal Sivyfievos, ipafflv, -rjv Atovfoov]. KaXXiarpards pois avroii ?xw|/» «! XApuv. yXi.fi.av 6Vt OVTUS iKaXeiTo TXA/xuiv, Cos b aK&Bapros. Kal SO^OKX^S iiri ipviou" Xdpwv. aXXot 5^ rbv XtifiCivra /cat dlvypov ' Toiis yXafwpohs Kara <pop/3dv.' Similarly TOVS 6
MANTEI1 aSovTai ye ciri Tairr) T% uoipia Ttipeoiai re Kal Ho\vS
636) made him infer that the corpse was on dry land by observing the flight of a sea-eagle, and discovering an owl super cellam vinariam sedentem atque apes fugantem (Hygin. fab. 136),—dflaaavitjTws, says Ael. nat. an. 5. 2, who rebukes Euripides for giving this account, because there are no owls in Crete. The owl (7\au£) no doubt pointed to Glaucus. Cf. Claudian. bell. Get. 443 (quoted by Welcker) Cretaque, si verax narratur fabula, vidit j Minoitm ruftto pnerum prodire sepulcro, \ quern senior votes avittm clangore repertitm j grami)ie restituit; mirae narn munere sortis \ didcia mella necem, vitam dedit horridiis angms. Perhaps we may infer from Aelian's remark that Sophocles did not mention the owl. Kuster (on Suid.) justly remarked that the sense of the words is obscure; and there is no direct authority for Portus's rendering voraces in pastu. Still •yk*" pvpovs can hardly mean 'blear eyed,' and Hartung's 'rothaugigen Vogel nach Futter' is unintelligible. yXapvpds is a rare word, which might be synonymous with yXd/iuv, as is shown by the proverb in schol. Horn. Q 192 e'v TVXQV irbXe'C yXafivpbs fiaaiXevet. H e n c e Hesych. I p . 432 yXafivpdv yXafiwdes. evvypov. iirbSaKpvn, which is plainly akin to Etym. M. p . 232, 44 yXa/xvpbv Kal yXafi&Ses' vypbv Kal Kaibpevov [T-rjKbfj.evov Toup) SaKpiois o/x/ia' Kal yXa/ivpovs,

ivvypo/Hous. The last words have the appearance of being a gloss on our passage, and suggest that Sophocles

OVTOI

Trod' tj^a

61

was speaking of aquatic birds. But even if the reference was intended, it would be hazardous to accept the interpretation. For it is much more likely, as Lobeck thought (Path. El. 1 p. 93), that y\ap.vpfc

was a by-form of \a/j.vpi>s

and was used by Sophocles in the sense of greedy. The scholiast connected it with yXd/iuv, because that word is related to Xriiiav in a similar way. Moeris p. 193, 30 yXaiiGxra 'ATTIKO/, Xrinwaa KOIVOV d/i0ATepa. (Blaydes should not have proposed to substitute Xa^vpois.) Probably however we should go further and infer from the association with aKadapTot that greediness connoted uncleanness of feeding in the ceremonial sense. The order in Suid. £onar. favours this view; but it is quite tenable, even if schol. Ar. preserves the original form of the note. Some birds, and this would apply particularly to the (hfiocjiayoi (Arist. h. a. 9. 1), were presumably ill-omened. Such was the vulture in all circumstances: Anton. Lib. 21 yvira VOVTUV opvWuv e'xftiv'roi' deoisre Kal avBp&irois. But the feeding of other birds might require for its interpretation the discriminating intelligence of the expert: Aesch. Prom. 504 ya/AiJ/wvtixuv re TTTT}(TLV cioiv&v GKeOp&s I Siujpio"'.. .Kal diaLTav TJVTLVCL ^XOV^'

CKCKTTOI. No better illustration of the omens to be gathered from the habits of the birds of prey is required than the well-known passage in the Agamemnon describing the eagles feasting on the pregnant b a r e :
397 Tuiv aKptov avev

397 Stob. flor. 29. 25 ( i n p . 632, 1 Hense) 2o0OKAeofS Sldio-cux. ' OVTOL ...irtivov.'

TTOVOV.

and Reisig's OVTOI TTO#' ?£et gives a wrong sense (see Jebb on O.T. 891). Meineke accepted OVTOL iro8' d^eifrom O. Schneider. Now in most of the passages which echo the famous lines of Hes. Op. 289ff.TTJS

It is obvious that the first part of the line is corrupt, and it has been variously 5' dpeTTJs idpwTa. deol Trpoirdpoidei* W-QKav j emended. Valckenaer (on Eur. Phoen. 576) proposed oinoi 7' £
IOOKAEOY£

62

through his figures consistently. Similarly Tucker had suggested TI 6l^g, but the use of TI is questionable (oiiSiirore Btgei Blaydes). The simplest correction would be Trpofft^Tj, which I should not hesitate to adopt if the authority for irpoaiKveto-Bai c. gen. were stronger than it is: the construction is defended by Verrall and Tucker in Aesch. Cho. 1031, but the legitimacy of the compound requires more support before it can be Chrys. 13. 35. Max. Tyr. 40. 4 di/e/CTJpv|e 5e rov dipiKhfievov els TO anpov ws tv considered as established. Mekler conjectured Vweiifej. d-ya0<ns dpuTTov. (Partly from H.) Hence H. conjectured iro0' if£ei, holding It should be added that Stobaeus quotes that the simple verb might be used for Eur. fr. 701 as if it immediately followed the compound (e0/£ei) as in fr. 245 n. this line; but there can be no doubt that (C.Ji. XVI 434); but he subsequently this is an error, as he had assigned it to hesitated between this and '«#££« on the Euripides shortly before (no. 9). ground that Sophocles did not carry T' es d/fpoK dvSpdas.

Quint.

14. 195

Ke?vos 5' O&TTOT' dvijp dper-ijs eirl T^pfJLtt.6' 'iKavev. X e n . mem. 2. i. 20 ai 5^ did Koprepias ^7n/^Xeicu xwc /caXwj' r e /cd7a#wz' ipywv i^LKveicrdai iroiod lueadai. Plat.pollt. 268 E &r' dupov a
398 TJV fxkv yap 010s fjiaXkos, rjv S' a/tr dfiireXov cnrovhrj re KOX pa
Porphyr. Je abst. S d TT\V 6eo p

f

19 KOX dvaiav ] p y

The verses are also quoted with variation in detail by Clem. Alex. Strom. 4 p. 565

type, an offering of first-fruits to induce a continuance of fertility. That it is also fireless (aVi/pos) is not directly stated, but is made probable by Eur. fr. 904 dvalav airvpov TrayKapireias &f
vpoxvOtlaav, and by the analogy of the eipeaiwvi). H. inferred that the sacrifice and v. 5 by the schol. on Eur. Phoen. 114. was chthonic (C. R. xvi 545). For the We are not informed as to the occasion significance of the airvpa see his n. on or object of this sacrifice, but the correAg. 70, Miss Harrison, Proleg. p. 93 ff., spondence in detail with the yearly Farnell in C. R. xi 294. Wilamowitz sacrifice to the Black Demeter at Phigalia (de tr. Gr. Jragm. p. 17) assumes that is very remarkable: Pausan. 8. 42. 11 the sacrifice was offered by Minos, and TTJ de$, Kadd KCU OL eirLX&pioi vofilconnects it with the asceticism of the v, ovS&v, TO. Si dirb T&V SivSpwv TWV Cretan mystics (Eur. fr. 472). Kappel]fpj3v rd Te #X\a KoX afj.ire\ov napirbv, macher (Wiener Eranos, p. 36) goes Kal fx.e\ta
MANTEII is specified: thus either prepared or in its natural state it appears in the worship of Zeus KTritnos (Athen. 473 c), in the ceremony known as nepixxpopia (Athen. 478 D), and even in the invocation of the Eumenides^ (O. C. 473). In El. 635 duu-ara ira.yKa.pwa are a propitiatory offering to Apollo as averter of evil. 1 See cr. n. Nauck would prefer

and see n. on fr. 1050, Lobeck, Paralip. p. 322: the converse case is illustrated by avBaSia beside aiSdSeta.—oXais is not introduced here as an adjunct to the sacrifice of a victim, but as an item amongst the various first-fruits. So Kpidai are mentioned among the contents of the Kepvos Athen. 476 F. For its importance in these rites cf. Plut. qii. Gr. 6, Tpi 8' evdfj.Tre\os or iji> Si BaKxtov. Stahlin p. 292 E, ol 7rXe?tTTOt T(OV '^WTJI^OJP Trpoj reads a7r' d/xTr^Xuiv in his text of Clement, ras irdvv TraXaias Ovcrtas 4xP&vr0 7*cus Kpi.do.1s, airapxofj.€pojv T&V TTOXLTGIV. attributing the correction to Schwartz. 2 cnrovSrj: a libation of wine, as dis4 c\a(as. Dind. writes ^Xaas, but tinguished from a drink-offering, together •both forms were in use in the fifth with an offering of grapes, appears to be century: see Meisterhans3 p. 32.—Kai contemplated. Miss Harrison formerly are. J. renders: 'And the fabric of {Prolegomena, p. 159) regarded the winemoulded wax, cunningly wrought by the offering as a later addition to the simple tawny bee.' Honey was commonly emritual of antiquity, but now treats the ployed for the appeasement of chthoman whole oblation as a magical rite intended powers (iJ.eMyfj.aTa: see Stengel, Gr. to stimulate the reproductive action of Sakralalt."- p. 90), but by no means exnature (Themis, p. 294). clusively for this purpose, as we have already seen.—|OU6TJS: see n. on Eur. 3 Tva-yKapima : see cr. n. Since the longer form is established by Eur. fr. 904, Hel. n i l , and Wilamowitz on Eur. Her. 487 ^oyddiTTepos fj.e\i
399 6 irp6cr0ev

iXOoiv TJV apouos JAOL V£KV<;. 3 9 9 fydpaids cod.

3 9 9 Hesych. I p. 269 apalov Kardrefer to the first of the two snakes which parov. 7) (d?s TO Mus., ws Nauck) '6 -rrpb- entered the vault while Polyidus was c$€v...vetivs' olov dpav Trpoaerpi^ero Kal imprisoned there, and was slain by him KaT€ux7}v (Nauck for /car' eux^s). 2o- to prevent it from harming the body of (pOKXrjs HoXveidq. Glaucus: see Introductory Note. It may be thought questionable whether the The meaning of dpalos as an attribute of VCKVS is hardly doubtful, for it is norm- corpse of an animal would be described as dpaios. Frazer, however, has collected ally applied to the dead, who as avengers copious stores of evidence in support of exact retribution for the wrongs inflicted the general proposition that ' the primiupon them. See the passages quoted on tive hunter who slays an animal believes fr. 110, and especially Trach. 1202, where the schol. has the gloss np,oipbs baifuav himself exposed to the vengeance either of its disembodied spirit or of all the (Rohde, Psyche, 1 p. 264). Welcker other animals of the same species, whom supposes that it is the corpse of Glaucus he considers as knit together, like men, which is described as bringing a curse by the ties of kin and the obligations of upon Polyidus; Hartungthat the speaker the blood feud, and therefore as bound (Minos) attributes the death of his son to resent the injury done to one of their to a chance meeting with a corpse. But number.' (G. B. n 2 p. 389.) Among neither view satisfies 6 irpbcdev t\duv; his examples are several attesting the .and it is more likely that these words

64

IO0OKAEOYI

reluctance of the American Indians to kill a serpent for fear of exciting the malevolence of its spirit (ibid. p. 395). That ideas of this kind were familiar to the Greeks can be readily established: see especially the accounts of the Bouphonia in Pausan. 1. 24. 4, 1. 28. 10, with the comments of Frazer (G. B. n 2 p. 294) and Miss Harrison (Proleg. p. 111). The

danger involved in the slaughter of the sacred ox may be compared with the offence of Agamemnon in killing a sacred stag in the precinct of Artemis at Aulis, which involved the retributory sacrifice of Iphigenia (El. 566—572).—For the break in the fifth foot, though containing a spondee, see n. on Eur. Hclid. 640.

400 4OO Hesych. I p. 208 dxraias- woXe/iiar, ix9pas. SO^OKX^S HoXveiSip. The meaning of the word avraios has been discussed on fr. 334, where it has

been pointed out that Bergk proposed to assign the corrupt xal SeTfia irpoo-tralovTa drratas ffeoii to this play,

MEAEATPOI The Homeric version of the legend of Meleager is as follows1. Artemis was wroth with Oeneus for omitting to sacrifice to her, when he made thank-offering to the other gods; and sent a wild boar to ravage his crops. Meleager, the son of Oeneus, collected a large company of hunters, and with their assistance killed the boar, but only after several lives had been lost. Artemis then provoked a dispute between the Aetolians of Calydon and the Curetes of Pleuron for the possession of the head and skin. A fight ensued, in which, so long as Meleager kept the field, the assaults of the Curetes were driven back. But Althaea, the mother of Meleager, grieving for the death of her brother2, cursed her son, and prayed to the powers of the nether world that he might be destroyed. Meleager was incensed and withdrew from the war. Then the Curetes got the upper hand, and pressed hard upon the defenders of Calydon. The elders sent an embassy of priests, promising Meleager a rich grant of land if he would come out and fight; and his father Oeneus, his sisters, and his mother also appealed to him, but in vain. At last, when the missiles of the foe reached his own chamber, and his wife Cleopatra reminded him of the sufferings likely to fall upon the inhabitants of a captured city, he yielded to her entreaties, and saved the Aetolians from their impending doom. It is not directly stated by Homer that Meleager was killed in battle; but his subsequent fate is clearly implied in the statement that 1

Horn. I 529—599. Only one brother is mentioned. It is assumed that he was killed by Meleager in the fight, altho' this is not directly stated. 2

MEAEATPOZ

6$

the implacable Erinys hearkened to Althaea's curse1. The epics known as the Eoeae (EGF p. 142) and the Minyas (EGF p. 216) agreed in the assertion that Meleager was killed by Apollo, who assisted the Curetes against the Aetolians. There is thus no evidence that the fire-brand upon the preservation of which Meleager's life depended was mentioned in any of the epics. But the absence of direct evidence is by no means conclusive ; the story is too primitive to have been merely a literary invention2. Moreover, although the legend of the fire-brand was familiar to the dramatists and owed a still wider extension to their writings, Pausanias (10. 31. 4), when quoting the Pleuroniae of Phrynichus (TGF p. 721) 3as containing the earliest allusion to it which is found in a play , adds that he did not introduce it as if it were his own invention, but rather as though it was already notorious throughout the Greek world. The version of Bacchylides (5. 95 —150) is of importance as showing that the death of Meleager in battle was not necessarily inconsistent with the story that he expired as soon as the brand was consumed in the fire4. So far we find no reference to Atalanta. But the prevalent form5 of the story relates that Meleager, who had invited Atalanta to take part in the hunt, fell in love with her, and insisted on presenting her with the hide of the Calydonian boar. The sons of Thestius were indignant that a woman should receive the trophy, and took it from her. Meleager slew them in wrath, and restored the boar-skin. Then Althaea kindled6 the firebrand, and Meleager died. It is generally believed that the prominence of the love-motive in the later authorities is largely due to the influence of Euripides, in whose Meleager {TGF p. 525) Atalanta undoubtedly took a leading part. It becomes important to observe that Apollodorus, after giving the last-mentioned 7version, which probably goes back to Euripides, adds another as current in different authorities. This consists mainly of an abstract of the Homeric story, with the addition of the name of Iphiclus as that of one of the sons of Thestius, and of a statement that Meleager was killed in battle. There is also a supplement to the effect that, after the 1 2

571 : cf. B 642. See however Jebb's Bacchylides, p. 469. Frazer, GB2 ill p. 358. Croiset in Melanges Weil, p. 78, attributes iis introduction to Stesichorus; but see Gruppe in Bursians Jahresb. CXXXVH 150. 3 Cf. Aesch. Cho. 603 ff. 4 The account of Nicander in Anton. Lib. 2 was formerly regarded as a late conflation. 5 Apollod. 1. 65—71, Ov. Met. 8. 270—546, Hygin./a*. 174, Diod. 4. 34. 6 See Robert in Herm. x x x m 130—159, Jebb, op. at. p. 472, Escher in PaulyWissowa 11 1892, Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 349. 7 i- 72. 73P. II.

66

£0<J>0KAE0YI

death of Meleager, Althaea and Cleopatra hanged themselves, and the women who mourned over his corpse were transformed into birds. Here we meet with an incident which is known to have been mentioned by Sophocles: Plin. nat. hist. 37. 11. 40 Sophocles tragicuspoeia...ultra Indiam fieri dixit (sc. clectrum) e lacrimis meleagridum avium Meleagrum deflentium. quod et credidisse eum vel sperasse aliis persuaderi posse quis non miretur? quamve pueritiam tarn imperitatn posse reperiri, quae avium ploratus annuos credat lacriniasve tarn grandes, avesque e Graecia, ubi Meleager periit,ploratum isse in Indos? (They were looking for the tomb of Meleager: ib. 10. 26. 74) These fj.e\eaOK\f)<; ev T&5 iSHeXewypai TOP yopbv

dirb iepemv Trapij-

yayev. The agreement with Homer was hardly accidental, and it seems legitimate to conclude from it that the siege of Calydon by the Curetes was a leading feature in the development of the plot3. If so, although Atalanta may have been mentioned as taking part in the hunt, as Brunck inferred from fr. n i l , her share in the plot can only have been of minor importance. Anyhow it is extremely unlikely that Euripides was the first writer who connected Atalanta with the Calydonian hunt4. Aeschylus wrote an Atalanta, but nothing is known about its contents. 1 R. Holland (in Roscher n 2588) thinks that the transference of the fieXeaypls to mythology was the invention of Sophocles. He supposes that the domestic fowl was called peMaypos (Hesych. s.v. rj KO.TOIK15IOS Spi/is) from /ueXedfeix,—a cant term like KOKKvfibas. The guinea-fowl received the same name, when first becoming known at Athens, from its resemblance to the barn-door chicken. All this is somewhat fanciful. 2 So Preller, Gr. Myth, n 3 205, followed by Ribbeck, Rom. Trag. p. 506, who supposes that Meleager was reconciled with his mother, but too late. So also Kekule, as reported by Kuhnert in Roscher n 2596. 3 This conclusion agrees with the observation made by Ahrens that the reference to the wild boar in fr. 401 implies that the hunt had taken place some time before the inception of the dramatic action. * See Pausan. 8. 45. 2, and Jebb, op. cit. p. 472.

MEAEATPOI 401

cruos \x,iyi(jTov \pr\i^ hr f

ArjTovs Trats eKij/SoXos

4O1 Lucian symp. 25 el St delirvov Ancaeus the Samian, son of Poseidon, fi/etca ipylfraBai aoi SOKSI, rb Kara TOI> who was killed by a boar which was Olvea ivvbrjaov. 6\pei yap tcai TT)V "Aprefuv ravaging his land : a dvcriaf, TOUS &\\ous Xuptois. The idiom, which was partly Beovs ii>. rial Be wepl avrQp...Kai colloquial, is well illustrated by Blaydes 2O(/>OK\^S '
Bmnck was the first to refer these lines to the Meleager. 1 o-vos |MY«TTOV XP'HC10- This periphrasis, the effect of which might be represented by the adj. monstrous, is elsewhere applied to a wild boar: Herod.

1. 36 w /3ao*i\eu, vbs xPVV-a lUyiGTOv dve(pdi/Tj Tifuf iv Trjxupy, Ss TO. Ipya 5ia
—a passage which so closely resembles the text of Sophocles that it may be regarded as another instance of the connexion between these two writers. H. quotes schol. Horn, x 9> telling the story of

See also on Eur. Phoen. 198.—yvais was corrected by Cobet to yvas, but the dative may well be right as involving the idea of hostility, 'against': cf. Eur. Phoen. 1129 \La.iravehs irpotTTjye \6x°" ^ T ' 'HWKTpais irijXais. T h e dative with eiri to

express motion towards was obsolete in the fifth century, though here and there examples may be found like Aesch. Theb. 701 IJ.T) '\6fis

odois
iriiXais. See also Headlam, On editing Aeschylus, p. 50, who justifies Aesch. I.e. as expressing the notion of destination.

402

Kpara 4O2

Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 95, 23 dfiirv-

Kols Kai Kara/ATruKois' !Zo(poK\Ti5 yieXedypy' '<7Te(fr&voi
were not previously known; but d/xirv/tdfu was used by Phalaecus in A.P. 13.

6, 3 KiacrQ Kai (rre<j>dvoiat.v d^ Cf. Etym. M. p . 86, 17 dinrvi TO rds ifiirpoadev dwb irpoffthirov px (nrapd^ety. E u r . Ale. 796, 832 o~ret]>dvois

wvKao-Seis. The words as quoted appear to be out of order, and should probably run KarafiirvKois | areipdvoitTL Kpara.

403 l£obpoirnv for Spvaiv {npiKo- will recall Verg. Jen. 6. 205 quale soldi jLOLo-a> in S 398. Agathocles was asi/vis brumali frigore vis cum \fronde virere nova...tails erat species auri fronStoicizing grammarian and pupil of Zenodentis opaca ilice. For the superstidotus, who has been identified with the writer of vTrofivrniaTa on historical and tions connecting the mistletoe with the life of the oak, and for its identity with geographical subjects {FHG IV 290, 4O3 Hesych. II p. 362 l£o6povs 8p6a.s' rds i$ibi> (pepovaa'i. XofioKXijs MeXeayptp.

5—2

68

IO*OKAEOYI

the Golden Bough see Frazer G. B. m 2 p. 447 ff. R. Holland in Roscher n 2588 explains the fr. by reference to the Indian trees exuding electrum mentioned in Plin. n. h. 37. 39 and compares the

conversion of the Heliades into (prjyoi (schol. Eur. Hipp. 733). This is scarcely convincing. Kuhnert, il>. 2596) thinks that the words came from a description of the hunt. Cf. Dio Chr. 72. 14.

4O4 4 O 4 Hesych. II p. 544, which is set out on ft. 288. It was perhaps not so unreasonable as the lexicographer thought to ascribe the operation of the lot to the heroic age; for as a religious institution it has been held to be of immemorial antiquity. For

the establishment of the lot at Athens see Sandys on Arist. Ath. pol. 8. 1, and Greenidge, Greek Constitutional History, p. 138. M. Mayer (de Eur. mythop. 77) strangely inferred that lots were drawn for a duel to decide the dispute between Calydon and the Thestiads.

405 avTifiotov 405 Hesych. I p . 212 avrlfioiov abpoiov, avrl {lobs Kadayta^bi^vov. 2o.

This may be merely an echo of the Homeric passages in which the ox is mentioned as a standard of value : see especially ir 705, a 431. But it may equally well contain an allusion to the custom of offering cakes of meal fashioned in the shape of an ox by those whose

means were insufficient to provide a living victim. Cf. Suid. s.v. f3oiis ipdo/ios. iirl TWV avaurOriTWV. oi yap TrivrjTes tpjpvXov ny &xoi>Tes Bvaai (w\aTT0i> il- a\etipov. dvofi^vojv d£ TWV ££ ^fiypijxwv, irpopdTov, u6s, alyos, po6s, opviBos, xw^i i^iero %pdop.os 6 ii- akcipov. Diogen. 3. 50

(Paroem. I 224). A similar custom of the Egyptians is mentioned by Hdt. 2. 47.

406 4O6

Prov. ap. Miller, Milanges de

litt. gr. p . 369 0Ti' nxiirqv 6 Xpiiannrot (ill p . 202 Arnim) T&TTCI Karh TWV iirl rb x^P0" *" T 0 ' s trp&yiuun irpo^aivovTOjv del irapit Tb dwi&u {3aLveiv /i^fXvrjTat TOU 6v6fiaTos2o<poK\ris tvMeXe&ypCji.

The name of the play is omitted in cod. Vat. 3. 36, Bodl. 754. Cf. [Plut] prov. I. 3 (Paroem. I 321) dirurafifiti• iirl TOSV 4irl rb x*'pov iv TOIS irp6.yp.aoi. Trpo/3atv6vTwv del • irapa Tb &viaw fialveiv. Eustath. / / . p. 862, 5 iv 5k Kara, UTOITKUOV Xe|iK(j> KOX iiruraiifiw eSpr/rat ij eU Toiirlffu dvaxupriaii

(Ael. et Paus. fr. 415 Schwabe). The form ovur&ixfluiv given Bodl. was rightly rejected by before the publication of the

text. There is no sufficient ground to displace the tradition that the word was connected with dvapaivw, but it is not clear how it is related, if at all, to ap.§av (Aesch. fr. 103) or ajujS??: see Etym. M. p. 81, 7. Analogy must have played a considerable part in the history of
1093),

na.Kdp.pn, Xa,u/3a,

Xypdnfir) and other obscure words with a similar termination. If we concede the verbal origin, the best parallel, so far as concerns formation, is perhaps ipp\
MEAEATPOI—MOYSAI KI5XXIJ. He compares irphaB-q, im/HXf/, id. I p. 203 anSpairi!)- i] ywi], irapa AdKdpXr), £ITIK\II, 6/ioic\i), ^7mrX?i, some of KUXTLV. Epich. fr. 185 K. Zvpaxdi (the which are as doubtful as their accents. city Syracuse). Athen. 109 A: Demeter As regards meaning, the hypocoristic -ci called Sirti by the Syracusans. But, forms such as 0aXXcii or KOC/J-W are closely whatever may have been its literary allied with nouns of agency, as Lobeck flavour, owtffafjLpii] was doubtless less has shown (Aglaoph. p. 733), quoting uncouth to Soph, than it seems to us; 7\tX
MINQI For this title see p. 4. 407 OVK ecrrt TOIS f^rj Spcocrt 4 O 7 Clem. Alex, stroni. 6 p. 741 2,<xpoK\iovs Si iv Mlvip 'ovK...Tixq' The famous maxim that God helps those who help themselves appears in many forms, one of which 8ebs Se Toh dpyovffiv oO irapiGTaTai {fr. adesp. 527) has already been referred to on fr. 308. The best known is Eur. fr. 402 ai5r6s TI vuv Spwv eTra datyuopa? ndXci' | ry yap irovovvTi Kal Seos av\\afij3dvei, who was following Aesch. Pers. 744 ctXX' Srav

filov Sijvair' ap f l/XX^yeii/ dvev irbvov, Hel. 756 Kovdeis iwXovTrjff' £/j.irtipoiaiv dpyos &i>.

The oldest source is perhaps Hes. Op. 309 Kal T' ipyatyiievos TTOXU (plKrepos aBavb.TOt.ijiv I £(T
implied in Horn. 726 (Athena is speaking) Ti)X^uax', oiXXa fitv airbs ivl (ppeai ayvi vwfjtreis, I aXXa 5^ /cat daifj.wv inrod'fiffeTat,

where the f/.4v- clause is logically subordinate. The Paroemiographers record e a K m ' ' ff-jrevSr} Tts aijros, x ^ @ ^ i;vvdTTTeTai, fr. the proverb TO 'ABifva Kal x V e

7ro/)Oi/xta eiri TQV firi xPVva-L ^ ^ TOZS TUIV 395 {pi\et 5e Ty Ka/xvovTi avv i\irl<ji Ka&i]fj.4vovs dpyeiv (Zenob. 5. Cf. E u r . / . T. 910 fiv 54 TIS wpbBvuos y, | tx84vetv TO dtiov piaKKov etK6TOJS ^Xel» &l. 93, Diogen. 8. 11). 80 dpybs yap ovdeis Qeoirs <=x&v avd ffTo/xa

MOYIAI This title appears, according to Haupt's restoration, in an inscription belonging to the first century B.C. (CIA II 992 I 25)1, which contains a catalogue of books dedicated by certain ephebi in the library of a gymnasium. The only fragment quoted under the title has in previous editions been attributed to the M.V
It might be suggested that Movaai was an alternative title to the Thamyras. Phrynichus employed it for a play which 1 Also published by Wilamowitz, Anal. Eur. p. 138. certain and are followed apparently by 'AX^avSpos

The letters avaai. are

70

I00KAE0YI

was produced at the same time as the Ranae of Aristophanes, and appears to have dealt with a similar subject (I 379 K.). Nothing is known concerning the Mov&ai of Ophelion (II 294 K.) or that of Euphron (III 321 K.). 408 afiokov ITTTTOV 4O8

Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 83,

22 &poKov Xvirov.

SO^OKXIJS Moiiirais (Mu-

aoh vulgo). a(3oXos is the name given to a horse before he has shed his teeth, i.e. according to Aristotle (hist. an. 6. 22. 576s 11) up to the age of 4J years. Plato distinguishes three ages TTWXOIS re a/36Xois Kal reXeiW re Kal afSdXuv TOIS /liaois Kal airois Si] TOJS

witticism. oiSiiroi Ix0"1

Bekk. anecd. p. 322, 2 #/3oXosT1

^ 7 r ' ™ >/ iSdvruv

yvwpio-ixa

seems to be inconsistent with Aristotle, and is perhaps due to a confusion between acquiring and casting the yviiipoves, the fourth set of teeth which an ass drops (Arist. 6. 23. 577 s 21): see also Suid., Hesych., schol. Plat., Eustath. Od. p. 1405, 20 Kal 6 &fio\os iiriros, 6 i^rjSixa

TAOS %xol"TL (kgg' 834 c). The best authority is Arist. I.e., 576b 13 dx/tdfei

a.a\v e/c^e^\7jKU)S 7rwXos TOV eipqjUvov yvd/wya oSbvra. Phryn. praep. soph,

di Kai'ITTTOS Kal 7)filofos fj-era roits fi6\ovs' Srav 5e iravras wiri /3e^XijK6T6S, oi pa.Bi.oy

p . 33, 13 ajSoXoi' KTTJVOS' TO fj.7] airofiepXijKos TOVS odovras, Si' we yvtapi^erai ij

yv^vat TT}V 7]\LKiav Sib KOX \4yovtn yv&Tjkiida. A horse which had lost all its firjv (yviofia al.) lxeivi °Tav ^jSoXos rj • milk teeth was known as KanqpTViciis : e Sray 8t ^e^X^/icis, O6K ?x '"' The last see the comm. on Aesch. Etim. tf6. sentence clearly alludes to a popular

MYIOI The title is recorded in the inscription already referred to in connexion with the Movaai (CIA II 992 I 24). It is generally admitted that this play was concerned with the fortunes of Telephus after his arrival in Mysia (see Introductory Note to the Aleadae, I p. 48); and the subject of the plot was traced by Welcker to Hygin./#& 100. King Teuthras was threatened by Idas, who cannot have been the Apharid as Hyginus states, but was probably a local freebooter from Mt Ida (Thraemer, Pergamos, p. 376), at the time when Telephus arrived in Mysia with his friend Parthenopaeus1. Hyginus states that Telephus came in search of his mother, following the command of the oracle, and this agrees with other authorities quoted on I p. 47, to which may be added Suid. s.v. ec-fta-ros Mvcrwv TrXelv ...evioi rrjv trapoijiiav TOV XpTjarfiov ~Kea? roirov; i\0a>v evpoi T0119 701/et?. 1 The two names were no doubt connected because both were reared amongst the hills of Arcadia, Telephus on Mt Parthenius, Parthenopaeus on Mt Maenalus (Eur. Phoen. 1162 n.). Thraemer argues that Soph, would not have confused independent legends.

MOYIAI—MYIOI

71

TOV oe Oebv irpoard^ai Tfkelv eirl TOV ea-^arov Mvtrwv. ai/c6fievov S 6t? Tevdpaviav, vifiecrdai yap ravra TO, %&>jot'a Mvcrovs, i-rrnvyelv

rfj fit]Tp\ aCrov (=schol. [Eur.] Rhes. 248). It is not certain, however, that this was the account of Sophocles ; for we have seen, in dealing with the Aleadae (p. 48), that Telephus had incurred blood-guiltiness by killing his uncles, and his exile may have 1been enjoined for the purpose of expiation {a-weviavTi<; TOVTO ye- | liiravTe^ dvSpo<j)6voi

yap

elaiv evl \6yq>). However this may be, the Sophoclean Telephus does not seem to have been under a ban of silence on his arrival: see fr. 411. Teuthras offered the succession to the throne and the hand of his adopted daughter Auge to the conqueror of Idas, and she was accordingly betrothed to Telephus, who with the assistance of Parthenopaeus successfully accomplished the adventure. But Auge, who was faithful to the memory of Heracles, prepared to slay her spouse on the wedding-night, and for that purpose concealed a sword in her bedchamber. Her intention was frustrated by a miracle: for a huge serpent issued from the ground to protect Telephus, so that Auge threw down her sword and confessed her treachery. Telephus was about to exact vengeance upon her, when she called upon Heracles, as the betrayer of her maidenhood. An explanation ensued ; and Telephus recognized his mother and returned with her to Tegea. Cf. A nth. Pal. 3. 2 TOV fiadiiv 'Ap/ca8l7)<; TrpoXnrtbv iraTov eiveica fia,Tp6<; I At/7779 TciaS' iire^rjv yas TevOpavTidhos, j Trj\e(f>o<;, HpaKKeovi (pl\io<; yovos at/TO? virdp^fov, ocf>pa pav a^jr dydyai 6? ireBov

'Ap/ca$i7]<;. That the story of Hyginus is old and derived from a tragic source is proved by Aelian nat. an. 3. 47 Sore fioi TOVS rpaya>hov Be TTJ y /cal Trpd^avrof av TO. aiiTa (sc. Ta> OISITTOSI), el fir) deia Bteipgev 6 8pd/c(ov, with a further reference to yvaipi

which is clearly intended for Telephus. The epigram quoted above was taken from the temple at Cyzicus dedicated to Apollonis the mother of Attalus, in which the recognition-scene may have followed the description of 1 Two different motives appear to be conflated in Prov. app. 2. 85 (Paroem. I 412).

72

ZO*OKAEOYI

Sophocles. Further, Robert holds1 that a series of events in the life of Telephus which comprise the plot of the present play is represented on the fragments of the smaller frieze of the Pergamene altar. Fr. 411 clearly relates to the arrival in Mysia, and Robert plausibly refers frs. 412 and 413 to a feast held in honour of the betrothal of Telephus and Auge. Arguing from Aelian that the tragic plot abstracted by Hyginus was known in the imperial age,—at a date when the works of the lesser tragedians had perished,—he concluded that the play, since it cannot have been the work of Euripides, must have been written either by Aeschylus or Sophocles. If Robert's premisses are accepted, we can hardly hesitate to prefer the claim of Sophocles; but when he proceeds to compare the plots of the Cresphontes and the Ion, and to infer that the Mysi must be later than the former (B.C. 427), because the recognition-scene takes place in the dakanos, his reasoning fails to convince. Still less can we follow Pilling (de Telephi fabula, diss. Hal. 1886, p. 63), who holds that the story in Hyginus is copied from the Iphigenia in Tauris of Euripides, and belongs therefore to a play subsequently produced. Thraemer {Pergamos, p. 374ff.)thought that Hyginus cannot derive from Sophocles, since Telephus had only to proclaim his errand in order at once to ensure recognition. The objection has been partly met by anticipation, and the absurdity of the situation is in any case no greater than in the Oedipus Tyrannus, where it has been successfully overcome. When Thraemer urges further that Sophocles followed the common version of Apollodorus (3. 103 f.) and Diodorus (4. 33), he omits to add that these writers record nothing concerning the recognition which could serve as a basis for dramatic treatment. For the historical facts which underly the legend see Ridgeway, Early Age of Greece, p. 181. 409 cus joi% Xpovov

KCLKCOS Trpdo-o-ovo-Lv XaOecrdai

rj8i> /cat

T
4O9.

/3pa)(vv

KCLKIOV.

2 xpfcwx A

4 O 9 Stob. flor. 26. 4 (ill p. 610, The sentiment is well illustrated by 7 Hense) TOC avrov (SA: SO0OKWOUS M. E u r . Or. 213 iZ irfrrvia. \r/0i) TG>v KaicQv, T h e extract follows fr. 670) Minruv. '<S>s as et aoipi) | KaX Tottn dvarvxovinv eiiKraia • ••naKuv.' 0e<Ss.— Nauck and Hense accept KO.V for 1 Bild und Lied, p. 48. See also the detailed discussion by the same writer in Arch.Jahrb. II 246 ff. O. Jahn, Telephos und Troilos, Kiel 1841, p. 6,s, approved Welcker's identification.

MYIOI KaC from Cobet (Coll. Crit. p. 190), who remarks ' reponendum est quod eo sensu constanter dici solet.' But this is put much too strongly. It is true that K&V would be defensible, if it were the traditional text, but there is no ground whatever for impugning KOL. AS a matter of fact, the passages where K&V is used in a limiting sense without a verb are very few in number. From those quoted by Jebb on El. 1482 (p. 224) Theocr. 23. 3J should be deducted, for

73

KOM there has no authority.

Add Ar.

Pint. 126 eav •diro^X^Tjs
Ran. 734, where Meineke conj. /cap for KCU, and in Plut. 946 the same question arises as here. Whether in all or any of these examples K&V should be resolved as Kai idv is a difficult question, on which opinions are divided.

410 yap ouSeiV 6

r)KKJT

eyotv 410

41O Stob. Jlor. 98. 23 7 Hense) So0o/f\eous Mfffwy. fiatcdpraTos.'

iJKurTa. codd.

(IV P- 833, ' a[i.ox6os...

The traditional text is not quite clear, and Tucker had some reason for suggesting the addition of Kaic&s after £xwv- The absence of context necessarily leaves a doubt, but on the assumption that fioxOovs, wtvovs or the like might have been supplied as the object to l%oiv— a construction for which see Jebb on Track. 260, El. 962—the adverb might stand in place of an adjective such as eXax'Vrous in accordance with a wellknown idiom : cf. Thuc. 6. 27 TO TrpcLyna. fjLei^ovoisiXdfj.^ai'ov, D e m . 2O.22T0t)sa7rapTas dirivTus irpbs ^/tSs airrois SLadGsjiev.

Ellendt is inaccurate in treating f/KHTTa as an adjective and equating it with ra iXdxuTTa.

For the general sense, which recalls the pessimism of O.C. 1225, cf. Herond. fr. 5 B. uis oiKiyv OVK ttariv cu/j.ap4ojs evpeTy | &veu KO.KWV faovvav' 6s 5' £x e i fjLeiOV j TOIJTOU TL, fjA^OV

TOU ET^pOV

86K€L

Trp-qaaeiv. (Susarion I 3 K. OI)K £<JTLV oiKeiv oiKiap avev KaKou, Menand. fr. 589, III 176 K. &vev KaKojv y&p oiKiav OLKOVfi.ivr]v I OVK £GTW evpeiv.) T h e metre,

i.e. three bacchiacs (cf. Aesch. Ag. 1069, Cho. 390) followed by an iambic tripody, is unusual and, if the text is sound, almost certainly incomplete.

'Acrta fjuev r) crvfiiracra /cATy£erai, £eve, Se Mvcrwv Mvcria Trpocrrjyopos. 4 1 1 . 1 £eii>t codd. fere omnes might be attained by putting a comma 4 1 1 Strabo 356, quoting examples after Mvi. Strabo quotes Eur. gate is just as good G r e e k . t y Ion 294, fr. 658- So conversely x^pa is passive also in Phil. 1353 T<JJ and yij are used where we should expect yopos; 'who will speak to me?' There JT6\IS: see on Eur. Phoen. 636, 1058.— is no difficulty in its application to a place 'The land of the Mysians is called rather than to a person: cf. e.g. Piat. Mysia.' It would be hypercritical to rep. 428 D rl TT)V T6XIV Trpoffayopeieis ; require ' The land belongs to the Mysians and is called Mysia,' though the result

IO*OKAEOY£

74

412 Se <£>pi>£ Tpiyoivo<;, avTicriracrTa re TJS iVfjLvel TT^/CTISOS crvyxophia. 412. 412

1 Te om. A altero loco

2 iQA/ivet A altero loco

Athen. 183 E fivq/ioveiet Si roO

Tpiytlivov Totirov Kal 2O0OK\?JS ei* /*&> Mwro?s 0O7WS ' Tro\iis...

follows that the TTTJKTI'S required to be played with both hands. Notice how cru-yxopSCa gains in significance. The double set of strings must also be indicated by the epithet SlxopSo^ attributed to the wqKTls by Sopater ap. Athen. 183 B ; for it is incredible that the TTTIKTIS (iroXjjxopdos) had only two strings. It is fair to admit that there were others— followed apparently by all modern editors —who gave the meaning ' responsive' to dvrlipdoyyor in Pindar (Athen. 635 D ) ; but these were at any rate later than Posidonius, and their authority cannot reasonably be set against that of Aristoxenus. TpC-ywvos, ' a triangular harp, associated with the ITT|KTIS (see on fr. 241).' (].) Plato banishes both instruments from his commonwealth : rep. 399 c rpiyihvuv apa.

Qafiipa (fr. 239). The quotation from the Mwroi is repeated at 635 C. 11. We must suppose that the verb governed by Tptyuvos occurred in a previous line together with another subject to which rp. is linked by 8e. Nauck is alone in retaining avyxopdia; for the nominative is clearly preferable. J. renders: 'And many a Phrygian harp..., and in response to it (adv.) resounds the harmony (avyxopUa. for avyxopSia) of the Lydian lyre.' But it may be doubted whether this is the true meaning of avTCoTraora. It should be observed that this passage and Phrynichus fr. 11 (v. infra) are adduced in support of the interpretation given by Aristoxenus to a particular passage of Pindar. And it Kai TTT]KT15O3V Kal irdvnav opydvwv, 8tra seems clear that it was Aristoxenus himp py self who quoted the use of ai>Tt SelTTvoHri AvSQv I \j/ahixbv dvrl- ancients, agreeing with Aristotle, were (pdoyyov v\pij\as dtcotiw Tn]KTidos. This of opinion that the rpiyuivov, and more refers explicitly to the TTTJKTII, but Aris- especially the aanpiK-q [another triangular toxenus treated TTTJICTLS and ftdyaftis as instrument], were only suitable for loose identical for the purpose he had in view songs and melodies and persons of light (cf. 635 E), and both of them belonged character.'—avrto-rroo-Ta, taken as adto the class of troXixopSa. Thus we can verbial by J., might equally well be the explain what in any other view of their object of tyvnvei (fr. 90) ; and this is interpretation is unintelligible, why three perhaps more in accordance with the quotations relating to the TT^KTI'S are usage of the verb. J. quotes Phrynichus inserted in the middle of a discussion fr. 11 TJ/aknoiaiv avriairaaT' deiSovres /uAty, concerning the nature of the /idyaSis. —adding ' if/aX/ids is the touching of a Aristoxenus explained \f/a\/ibv airl(p8oy- cithara's or a lyre's strings'—and Diogenes

yov thus : 5ta TO BLCL S60 yevwv dfia Kai Sia iraaSiv ?xeiv TV" owifilav dvbpCbv re Kal TralSuiv. T h a t is to say, the TTTJKTIS

(or fidyadis) had two sets of strings in different octaves, so that it could be used to accompany the antiphonal singing of men and boys. Similarly here dyrienraara means ' doubly-twanged (notes)'; and it

fr. 1. 9 ij/a\iims Tpiywvuv irqKTiSwv tfiyois I OKKOU KpeK0ij
dvrii.e.

sounding the nAyadis, a variety of the Trr/Krls, with twangings that answer to the noise of rpiyavoi and TnjKTtdes. In the last passage all three instruments are said to be played by Lydian maidens.

MYZOI

75

413 \fie\ta, Tia/aas xal a-iavpvcoBr) aTokrjv 413

i/
a Bergk) scripsi: i/
413

Pollux 10. 186 (palris 5' SP KO.1 purple KCLVBVS, for which see Holden on o~iavppa.v, Alffx^Xou p.ep £p Krjpv^t aartipois Xen. Cyr. 1. 3. 1. But it was not so (fr. 109) XiyoPTos ' KOTA TT)S aiovppris TTJS much the material as the shape of the Xeopre'a.s,' 2O<^>OKX^OUS 5' ep MKO-OIS ' ^aXlSas Persian robe, completely enveloping its ...crToXrjp.' Hesych. IV p . 34 refers to wearer, which excited the wonder of the the present passage:
414 adLTOV$ 4 1 4 Hesych. I p. 335 do/cX^s MvffoTs. H. compares Suvpdetpeiv ypu/i-qp Aesch. Ag. 923 (to let one's resolution weaken),

X«ipa 8' 06 8ia Eur. Med. 1055. A d d Plat. legg. 768 B ddtatp&dpovs TGUS der](re
(ducaards),' unmoved by entreaties.' One would expect the phrase to refer to the

76

I04>0KAE0YI

deathless purpose of the gods, after the KaT$av6vTWP ft; fiiv otf, yvii/iifv 5' ? x e ' I pattern of Horn. Q 88 Zeus S.s atfidna elSws. In Pind. nexion to use dSdvaros of a human Pyth. 8. 71 6tGiv 5' oinv \ &6ITOV afrdoi,emotion ('fixed opinions,' Blaydes) would SZtvapKes, iVierepats TI>X<«S the adj. is be arrogant: Eur. fr. 799 un' ii/iCfrv gipv, \ oiiru! irpoatftcei tive is objective; but Schroeder adopts /i.r)di TT\V dpyty ? x e ' " I aBivaror i>
Eur. Hel.

1014 6 KOOS | TCIV

o'tatftpoveiv kirla~TO.To.i, T r a g . fr. adesp. 79.

415 a/TrojBa.6pa. 4 1 5 Hesych. I p. 243 airofjadpa. • atro- Soph, (like iwi^aOpa in Ap. Rhod. 1. 421) PaTijpta, rj tcXi/ial- ceiis. 2o0o/f\-i;s Mvcrots. for d7ro3arijpia = a sacrifice made on landBekk. anecd. p. 426, 18 airofitidpii' airoing. He quotes in support Dio Cass. 40. §aTT)pi.a (sic), ovru SO0OKX^S. Cf. Phryn. 18 KO.1 Ta 5iaj3aTi)/>mTOre a,Trbf3a.8pa cr
416 dnocrvpeL 416 airoGTrq.

Hesych. I p. 259 2o0o/cX^s Mi/
Nauck was inclined to approve M. Schmidt's conjecture that the lemma diro$pti(pei had been lost before dirocrtfpei.

He drew this inference from Etym. M. p. 127, 19 dwodpifai- diroairq., dTroaipu: but it is not unlikely that the reference there is to Horn, ty 187 dwo5p6<pot..

417 airvpov 4 1 7 Hesych. I p. 276 diripov dBvrov. 2O0OKXT;S MWOIS.

(i/irupos, as an epithet of dvala, serves to describe the bloodless offerings of fruit, cereals, and liquids, as distinguished from the sacrifice of an animal victim, because the former were not as a general rule consumed by burning on the altar. See Farnell in C. A'. XI 2946°., who has established this meaning for Aesch. Ag. 70, much in the same way as it was afterwards independently explained by Headlam. Cf. Eur. fr.

912, 4 Buffiav airvpov irayKapretas. The Rhodian sacrifice was a famous instance: Pind. 01. 7. reufac S' diripois Upoh \ aXtros iv aKpoiroM. See also fr. 398. diripov here may have been the epithet of some such word as ireXdvov, and though there are other possibilities (see Farnell, p. 296, Stengel in Pauly-Wissowa 11 293) none is so likely as this. The gloss dOirov would then be referable to the stricter sense of dieiv ' to consume with fire,' for which see Miss Harrison, Pro/eg, p. 55.

MYIOI—MQMOI

77

418

418 Hesych. I p. 307 aaTpatp-qf UK\rjp6i" 2ott>OK\rjs ~Slvcrwv (Mv nor H o r . Cartn. 2. 2. 23 octtlo

inretorto is exactly in point. But the explanation cr/cX^pos hardly favours this, since da-Tpeirros, arpcirTOs (cf. "Arpowos), and even Arei/ifs, which is frequently applied to the eyesight, acquired the sense unbending in other connexions.

MQMOS IATYPIKOI The character of the fragments, apart from the direct evidence of fr. 424, shows that the Mw/ios was a satyr-play. Welcker1 was certainly wrong in thinking that Kwyu.09 rather than Mw/io? was the real title. Choeroboscus in Theod. p. 376, 18 confused the play of Sophocles with one written by Acnaeus (TGFp. 753) under the same title. Momus is mentioned in Hes. Theog. 214 as one of the children of Night, but is scarcely referred to elsewhere in extant Greek literature, until he appears as a character in the dialogues of Lucian. The only trace of his active participation in the events of the heroic saga is to be found in schol. A Horn. A 5, where the desire of Zeus to relieve the burden imposed upon the earth by over-population is said to have been gratified in the first instance by the Theban expedition, in which many lives were lost : varepov Be iraKuv (TVfi/3ov\

Cypria given by Proclus (EGF p. 17) is too brief to prove that Momus is substituted by the scholiast for Themis2; but whether he appeared in the epic narrative or not — and the scholiast certainly implies that he did—the story of his being taken into council is unquestionably old, and nothing else is so likely to have been the subject of this play. In that case, it was the first part of a trilogy—not of course in the technical sense—of which the second and the third were the "E/n? and the KpiW? (see I p. 139, n p. 29). 1

Nachlr. p. 298.

2

Gruppe, p. 66i x .

78

IOOKAEOYI

Wagner preferred to find the story of the play in the fable related in Lucian Hertnot. 20, according to which Momus found fault with the model of Man made by Hephaestus, because there were no windows in his chest to expose his inner feelings.

419 it should be cured by such a reading as 4 1 9 Hesych. I p. 136 dXwvnji;' opxv •en's m . Kai dXonreKlai /xufioif, us 2o0o- dXw;re/dae fiufiu < )j.ivw >• v (or could fiuKXTJS, Sirep earl iv awfiari irados yevd/ievov. IxSurBai. take a dat. on the analogy of fi^Htpeadai?) is hard to say. It is anyThis difficult and corrupt passage has how more probable, apart from metrical been severely treated by the critics. (i) Soping's conjecture akwireida us 2,o<poK\ijs considerations, that Sophocles, like Callimachus and Herondas, preferred dXw7r?;£ Mii/Uf has so far won acceptance that the to the pseudo-scientific dXanre/c/o. I confragment is generally reckoned under the clude, therefore, (1) that the evidence title MfijUos. So Nauck, who however keeps dXojireKlai as the lemma. (2) M. does not warrant the ascription of this Schmidt, bracketing the words Kal dXoi- fr. to the MG>os; (2) that ahdmijl- should weidat. and oirep...yei>6nevot> as belongingtake the place of dXw7re/c(a in the text. to an earlier gloss, recasts the residue as a\wr]£, {XiQas, violent proceeding, but it is (3) partially Kiiuv, KOptipas, olarpos for dXoi7rejcia, e\eaccepted by Dindorf, who holds that the (pavTlaais, etc. Cf. Callim. h. Art. 77 TO explanation 6pxyah T " alone relates to 5' tLrpixov ela^ri KaXvvv | [leffffaTiov ffrtpvoio Sophocles, and apparently acquiesces in fiivH fitpos, ws ore KbpaTJ \ (purbs hiSpvvSoping's Mcijuw. Crusius on Herond. 7. Seiaa KSfiriv dvevet^ar' dXu7n;f. Herond. 72 takes the same view as Dindorf. (4) 7. 72 £
420

4 2 O Hesych. I p. 163 d)iLov was probably a colloquial rather
MfiMOZ

79

421

•421

Hesych. I p. 184 dvacrru^ai •

ejrapai TO aidotov, •/) o-rvyvaaai. 2O0OK\?)S Mtiiiuf) (fj.w/j.Q cod.). T o the same effect

Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 123, 8, but without t h e na me of the play.

F o r orvyv&vai,

.which is corrupt, M. Schmidt conj. -trrucat, Blaydes opyidcai or dpyijaat:

L. and S. require correction. Cf. Pollux 2. 176 TO fitvTOi dvonnrdaat T6 aidoiov wapd roll dpxalots KCOfjLLKoTs (fr. adesp. 8 1 , III 4 1 4 K . ) dvao-Tu\pai ra\CITCU. Suid. s.v. dva
Blaydes conj. dmo-ruo-ai.

422

4 2 2 Hesych. I p. 204 ivdpuuKe- &vui W^UO-LV oi deaTai. — Instances of the OpdaKe, opxov (opxois cod.). Zo<poK\fjs apocope of dvd in Sophocles are given TAdiliif (KWIXUI cod.). The corrections by Jebb on Atit. [275. Both in Attic were made by Joseph Hill (1663). and Ionic apocope is sparingly employed, and appears to be a dying-out usage, For this feature of tragic dancing cf. surviving where it did owing to literary E u r . Tro. 325 7rdX\e ir6S' aiO^ptov, ib. 332 association. Of the tragic poets Aeschy&va.ye irdda abv (so I would read and lus uses it most freely. See Smyth, Ionic connect). A r . Vesp. 1492 triceXos obpdvibv Dialect, § 322, and for the phonetic * y ' t K \ a K T L £ b ) v , i b . 1 5 2 4 KOX TO Q p l history of apocope Monro, //. G." § 180*. £K\dKTlO'dTOJ TiJ, 6'7TW9 | ld6vT€S O.V

423 4 2 3 Hesych. 1 p. 257 dironKoKvirTe- ib. p . 423, I dwcffKoKuKTe' KvpLois TO Sepfxa d cod.) Kai dtroKoXove. <pao~i Kal Tbv TreptTCT/j.rj/iei'oi' TO alSo'iov Rtym. J/. p . 120, 27 dir£iTKo\vfifj.€vos... KaTaxpyCTLKais 8£ Kal iiri TOV dToyeyvfj.vcijd7reaKo\vfj.fi4fov {direaKO\V/J.€VOV cod.). Sofiivov, fj TO dfp/j-a d<pripTiiJ.ivov. Ael. Dion. in Ar. Ach. 158. Archilochus 2o<poK\rjs 5£ TO diroKoXovt iv (corrected by Ellendt to diroj7Ko\vTTTe Tb diroKoXove £v Mayitjj).

had used the word (fr. 124).

Cf.

424 apirrjv 424 Spiiravov. o-aTvpiK$.

Bekk. anecd. p. 446, 12 d'p-n-qv weapon, such as Perseus used against the Gorgon (Apollod. 2. 39), and HeraZO0OK\?)S Mib/iy (vbiitf cod.) cles against the Hydra (Eur. Ion, 192). a scythe, or scythe-shaped

8o

I04>0KAE0YZ NAYTTAIOI KATATTAEQN NAYTTAIOI FTYPKAEYI

Four fragments are cited from the KarcnrXewv (425—428), three from the Trvpicaevs (429—431), and five simply from the Na^7rA,to? without a distinctive addition (433, 434, 436—438). Fr. 43s clearly belongs to the Trvpicaev*;, if that was a separate play. Now, the most famous incident connected with the name of Nauplius was his conduct in displaying false lights on the southern promontory of Euboea for the purpose of drawing the Greek fleet on to the rocks, when driven before the storm, in order that so he might revenge himself for the judicial murder of his son Palamedes: Eur. Hel. 767 ra ISlavirXiov T Rvf3oi/cd TTvp-rro'Krjfiara, Verg. Aen. 11. 260 Euboicae cautes ultorque Ca-

phereus1. Hyginus {fab. i'i6), after referring to the death of the Locrian Ajax, continues: ceteri noctu cum fidem deorunt inplorarent, Nauplius audivit sensitque tempus adesse ad persequendas filii sui Palaniedis iniurias. itaque tanquam auxilium eis afferret,facem ardentem eo loco extulit, quo saxa acuta et locus periculosissimus erat. illi credentes humanitatis causa id factum naves eo duxerunt; quo facto plurimae eorum confractae sunt militesque plurimi cunt ducibus tempestate occisi sunt membraque eorum cum visceribus ad saxa illisa sunt: si qui autem potuerunt ad terram natare a Nauplio interficiebantur1*. It is probable, but not certain, that this story was related in the epic Nostis, and in a poem of Stesichorus bearing the same title4. But Sophocles is the earliest authority to whom the narration of Nauplius' treachery can definitely be ascribed ; for it is patent that such is the explanation of the title irvpicaevs. Cf. Pollux 9. 156 6

S' ifnTprjaa1; Td% av irvpicaev'; ovofia^ono tear Ala^yXov ical %otyoicXea ovrwi itTirypdtyavTa<; ra Bpa/iara, rov ftev TOP IIpofirjdea, rbv Be TCV NavirXiov.

The alternative title KaTcnrXetov prima facie suggests the existence of another play, unless a strong reason to the contrary is forthcoming. After some hesitation, Welcker finally concluded that there was only one play with a double name 5 ; 1 The chief passages referring to the incident are Lycophr. 384—386, Philostr. her. 11. 15, Apollod. epit. 6. n , Sen. Ag. 588 ff., schol. Eur. Or. 432, Quint. Sm. 14. 614 ff. We may assume that Lucian de salt. 46 refers to the Noi)7r\ios irvpicaeis: Kad' 'eKaarov yovv T&V (net (at Troy) ireabvTav Spa/xa rr/ cncqvrj Tp6KeiTcu...ii Kara. TlaXafirfdovs 4irif$ov\r} xal T) Nai/TrXioi; ipyf) KT£. 2 Hence I attempted to explain fioviKunros in Eur. Hel. 1128. 3 The words of Proclus are: eW 6 irepl ras KacpripLSas irirpat irjXovTai. x^y-^v (EGF\>. 53). For modem opinions see Robert, Bild u. Lied, p. 182, Holzinger on. Lycophr. 385, Gruppe, p. 7003. 4 Fr. 33. The inference is drawn from Tzetz. Posthom. 750.

NAYTTAIOI

81

and Dindorf took refuge in his familiar device of a new edition published under a revised title. Now, the word /caTcnrXecov must mean either 'landing' or 'returning by sea,' and one of the chief objections to the views of Welcker and Dindorf is that such a title does not seem appropriate to a play with the plot that has been sketched above. To this Welcker replied (i) that icaraTrXeiov may have been merely descriptive of Nauplius as the Sailor, and without any relation to the plot. But that is a pure guess, which is hardly consistent with the use of KarairXelv; and he would evidently have preferred (2) the impossible alternative of giving to KaTawXicov a causative meaning. R. Wagner 1 , who accepted Welcker's conclusion, explained KaTtnrXecov as landing in Euboea, and inferred that Xauplius was an Argive, who came to Euboea for the special purpose of destroying the Greek fleet. He relied on the words fj/cev et? Eu/3otai> in schol. Eur. Or. 432. But the hypothesis of a double title is altogether improbable ; and Welcker was only driven to adopt it, because he could find no possible plot for the KaTairXeayv, and was unwilling to leave the subject-matter unidentified. A more plausible solution was proposed by Huschke 2 , who interpreted KarairXecov as landing at the Greek camp near Troy, and inferred that the play described the arrival of Nauplius to exact retribution for the death of Palamedes, and the rejection of his claim. He supported his contention by quoting schol. E u r . Or. 432 Nai;7r\tO9 he. aKOv6vov TOV 7rat8d?' TMV Be E\Xi}wiw' /ca,ToXii> avrov, Trpos TO Keyapia fhkvov TOI? fiaaiXevaiv, diro-rrXevo-a^ «rre., to which m a y

now be added Apollod. epit. 6. 8

TOVTO

fiaffwv Na.u7rA.t09 ewXevae

Trpb<; Tot"? "EXXrjvas Kal TTJV TOV TTCUBOS airyTet, iroivr/v a-rrpaicTOS Be viroo'Tpe^ra'i, 0)9 TTCLVTW ^api^ofievcov TC3 ftacriXel Ayafx.efx.vovi

There is nothing in the fragments quoted from the KO.TCLwhich assists a decision; but, since the unjust condemnation of Palamedes was the subject of the play so entitled, it would seem that Sophocles must have largely readapted the same material, if in another play he described the appeal of Nauplius against the previous verdict. But that is not all; for there are good grounds for thinking, as will be shown in the Introductory Note to the Palamedes, that the arrival of Nauplius was actually included in that play. However, Huschke's theory is not the only possibility; for there were many stories current concerning the malicious injuries inflicted by Nauplius upon the murderers of his son. 1

Epit. Vat. p. 264 f. Anal. Crit. p. 241. The same view is adopted by Nauck, who accordingly refers frs. 432 and 433 to the Ka.To.ir\iav. See also Meineke, Anal. AUx. p. 132. 2

p. 11.

6

82

SO<J>OKAEOYI

Thus, he punished Odysseus by throwing Penelope into the sea (Eustath. Od. p. 1422, 8), and by causing his mother Anticlea to hang herself on the receipt of false news relating to her son's death (scholl. Horn. X 197, 202). Nor was his vengeance limited to the house of the rival and accuser of Palamedes. In Lycophr. 1093 he is described as toi.aia'S e'^tvo? f^rj^avaU olico
TUS ^ w p a ? ra<> ' EtXXr)vt,8a<; yvvai/cas fj,oij^ev6rjvai, K\v-

^ Alyicrda>, AlyidXeiav TOO %0eveXov KO/A^TJ / MrfSav inro Aevicov fjv Kal dvelXe Aev/cos a/u.a cnOvpq TT] Ovyarpl ravTt]<; iv T&5 vaw irpoafyvyovcrri, KaX Sexa •7ro\ei<; diroairdaa'i TT?? K.py]T7)<; eTvpavvrjcre tcre1. T h e arrival

of Nauplius on such an errand would naturally account for the title icaTcnr\e
There was certainly material enough for a tragedy in the ruin of the house of Idomeneus2. It should be stated that R. Wagner3, arguing from the words a>? oi rpwyiKol Xeyovcnv used by Apollod. 2. 23 in reference to Clymene, the wife of Nauplius, derives the major part of epit. 6. 8—n from the TpayaySovfieva of Asclepiades, but separates from it the passage relating to the seduction of the women, which he traces through the Nosti of Lysimachus to an Alexandrian source. But this arbitrary division is not generally approved4; for there is no reason to suppose that this part of the Nauplius-myth is any later than the story of 1 Brunck quoted Tzetz. Lycophr. 384, which we now know to have been derived from Apollodorus, as probably containing the subject-matter of the Nai/7rXios Karair\{uv, but his remark has passed almost completely unnoticed. 2 See the n. on fr. 431. It should, of course, be observed that that fragment is quoted from the NaifarXios TrvpKaetJS, but, as the plot of that play was, on the present hypothesis, later in time than that of the Karairktuiv, an allusion to an event which may have been comprised in the latter is not excluded. s Epit. Vat. p. 269. He conjectures that the reference to the death of Nauplius in Apollod. 1. 23 was taken from an oracle quoted in the closing scene of the Sophoclean play. 4 See Gruppe, p. 7003. Holzinger (on Lycophr. 610) thinks that these stories were related in the Cypria or the Nosti.

NAYTTAIOI

83

the Euboean shipwreck, or that of the false charge against Palamedes. Another alternative, which some may think more probable, has been put forward by J. Geffcken1 on the strength of Apollod. 2. 23, where it is stated that Nauplius, son of Poseidon and> Amymone, spent a long- life as a sea-farer, and was wont to entice other voyagers to their death by kindling delusive flares. But at last he himself met his end in the same trap through which he had lured others to their destruction-. Nauplius here figures as the piratical buccaneer, the terror of the high seas, who on his return home is hoist with his own petard. The details are so vaguely indicated that we cannot frame even the skeleton of a tragic plot. Lastly we may add that Vater3 discovered a subject for the KarairXewv in the relations of Nauplius with Aleos and Auge, supposing that the play was dramatically the earliest of those which dealt with the story of Telephus. This is a solution which few will approve. M. Schmidt conjectured that the gloss of Hesych. I p. 251 aTroXot/xiov <j)avov TOV eirl 86\cp was taken from the Nauplius. 425 Zeu iravcrCkvire KOU Atos (rwrr\plov cnrovhr) Tpirov KpaTrjpos 4 2 5 Schol. Find. Isth. 5 (6). 10 TOV Se Tp'nov Kparrjpa. Aids o-UTrjpos PKeyov, Kada. KOX "ZotpoKKrjs ev "SavirXiq ' Z e D . . . KparTJpos.' Schol. Plat. Charm. 167 A Tp'nov r y \u crirevdeTai re /ecu 6 Kparijp rpiros TWerai.. Zo<poK\ijs XavirXiiji 'nai... Kparr/pos,' KOI HX&TUJI/ IloXireiats (583 B). Schol. Plat. Phileb. 66 D TO rpirov Tip ITUTTJPI] iK /ieraipopas dp-qrai TOV ev rats Gwovoiais ^Bovs. ^oOK\rjs ev Nau7r\t(fj KarairXeovTi. eiapvdvTO yap iv avrah KparTJpes rpeis. Kal TOV /j-ev irpiiTov Aios 'OXu^7riou Kal BeCiv 'O\vfnrlav a e y o c , TOV Se deiirepov ypwuv, TOV 5e TpWov truTTJpos. The same note is given in Hesych. iv p. 178 s.v. Tp'iTos KpaT-qp: cf. Phot. lex. p. 604, 25 TP'ITOV KpaTTjpos' TOV (TwTijpos, Sv Ka.i TiXeiov ^Xe7oi'. [It may be observed incidentally that Nauck was quite wrong in wishing to read ix fieratpopas d 4 K TOV in schol. Plat. Phileb. I.e.

The regular phrase is with the genitive alone, as may be seen from the following instances in the scholia to Sophocles: Ai. 1 CK neTa<popas TCJV nvv-qyuv, ib. 1329 eK fteTatpopas TUJV KOIVQS iperrotn-ojv, El. 1074 CK ixeraipopS.^ TWV vy&v, 0. T- 173 €K /xcTcupopas rSiv avw vevovrwv fioyis iv ™ v/ix€IJ@aL> Ant. 158 in /iera0opas TQV iptaabvrav, ib. 1086 eK ixeraipopas T&V epirerQv, Track. 203 e/c f/.€Tafpopas rod i)\iov. See also Rutherford, Annotation, p. 207.] It is clear that our passage was a stock instance with the grammarians, and that all the quotations given above are derived from a common source: this was in all probability Didymus, from whom they may have passed to Diogenian, and thence to the Platonic scholia, iravo-iXvirt. Similarly Callim. h. 1. 92 addresses Zeus as Suirop dTij/io^ii)!. Plut. com in. not. 33 p. 1076 B: the Stoic

1

Hermes XXVI 38. The words edvacfibpei. irplv reXevrijo-at are corrupt: see Wagner, Epit. p. 265 f. 3 Aleaden, p. 28 ff. For the story see I p. 46. 2

6—2

Vat.

IO<J>OKAEOYI

84

doctrine that all men are sinners is inconsistent with such titles given to Zeus as "Zonr/p or MeiXix'os or 'AXefi-

for Zeus Soter. To this last allusion is frequent: Aesch. Suppl. 26 na\ Zeus SUITT;/) rplros, Ag. 257 (of Iphigenia)

KO.K0S.

TpirSffTrovdov eOirorfiov iratdva tpLXois £TL/J.CL, Eum. 762 rod irdvra KpalvovTOS rptrov cuiTTJpos, fr. 55 rpirov Aids auTrjpos eiic-

2 Tp^TOv Kpanijpos. Three bowls were mixed at a banquet, as stated above: (i) the first in honour of Zeus Olympios and the other Olympians, (2) the second in honour of the heroes, and (3) the third

ralav \lf3a, with the ghastly parody of Clytaemnestra in Ag. 1386.

426 acnnhiTrjv ovra < KOI > ire
Kal add. Meineke

Steph. Byz. p. 135, 5 aawk...

TO 5£ a
fiivov' ' us...Tofei)/iapayii.hov, i.e. inrepwyiJ.ivov.— d
the corresponding forms (?0op|a, etc.) wherever the verb occurs in tragedy, although the evidence of the MSS is all the other way. Photius supports vaitpapxrov in Ar. Ach. 95, and the inscriptional evidence, though slight, indicates that (ap%a was earlier than t
—Dindorf writes Tetpapy/xivov here, and

427 ft>S do"7TiSoi)^os rj ". 4 2 7 Steph. Byz. quoted on fr. 426. It is not altogether clear, as Papageorgius pointed out, whether this fragment is quoted from the Nauplius or from another play. In printing the line as interrogative I follow a suggestion of Wecklein {Berlin, philol. Woch. 1890, 656). Blaydes conj. TIS TO£AT?;S or the like, and pCiv for ws. There appears to be a contrast made between the hoplite (do-7riSo0xos) and the archer. The comparison is generally contemptuous of the latter: Ai. 1120 fT. 6 TOJATTJS ioiKev ou pp pp I acrirld'

ei Xd/3ois.

E u r . Her.

159 8s

oihror' &tnrl5} &7%e Tpos X a i £ %£P' I ••• dXXd T 6 £ ' IXUVJ I K&KKTTOV b'w\ov KT4.

The Scythians were typical bowmen (Aesch. Prom. 737 2/ci}0as 5' d0t|j7 vo/idSas ot... eK?)/36Xois T&,OUSI.V i%T)pTviLivoi, Cko. 160 1/KV8IK6. r ' eV xepoiv | irahivTov' iv tpy<ji /3A?; VnrdXXwj' "A/»;s), but their

introduction into tragedy is anachronistic. The Persian wars brought them to the notice of the Athenians, and the Scythian police, public slaves and originally no doubt recruited from a nucleus of Scythians, were established at Athens by Speusinus (schol. Ar. Ach. 54) early in or towards the middle of the fifth century.

428 428

em./COT a Hesych. II p. 157 iirlnoTacan be drawn from Cko. 626. In Pind.

iirinoix<j>a (iirLiJLop<j>a cod.), a iras &v T<S fr. 109 (TT&aiv airb wpairldos ivUoTov {airaaav TU cod.) fiifixfiaiTO. 2O0OKXTJS aveKiSiv the epithet is transferred and. if NauirXiifi KarairhiovTi (vavKXloi Kal irhiovri we had the text of Sophocles to which

cod.). IITCKOTOS, an Aeschylean word, is elsewhere always active; for no inference

Hesychius refers, we might find that the same explanation applied here.

NAYTTAIOI 429 /ecu

429 429

KOU KV/3O>V

irecrcra

/3o\ai

itcurdypafi/j.a Eustath., Etymoll.

Pollux 9. 97 iireidr) Si frjtpoi

fj.ev eiffui ol ireTTol, TT^VTE 51 e/cdrepos rdov TTOLi$bvTb)v eTxev *lrL TT£VTE ypa^iiCiv, eiKbTWS etpTjTai ^.o<poK\el ' Kai 7re
€,

1T€lfT€fiTjl/QP

X^-yow

Kai

TT€VTem)XV

(CCCLXXVI R.). See also Ael. Dionys. fr. 153 Schw., Moeris p. 207, 34. The grammarian's dictum is borne out by the stone records, for it is only in postclassical times that the e passed into a, owing to the analogy of rerpa-, cirra., ^i-^aand S4«a: see Meisterhans3, § 62, 3, Etym. p. 127, 1 quotes the words Kai whose earliest example is irevTdfj.vovs Treuira irevrdypafiiia from Sophocles, and (100 B.C.). Further evidence is given by in Etym. M. p. 666, 18 and Eust. Od. Lobeck, Phryn. p. 413. For the working p. 1396, 60 the same words are quoted of analogy in the form of the compound without an author's name. Eust. Od. see Brugmann, Comp. Gr. II p. 28, E. tr. i 1 p. 1397, 29 ~Lo<poKkT)s Kal...$o\aL' —KI|3UV PoXaC is not merely dicing, but includes Kvpda, a game of skill correThe reference is undoubtedly to the inventions of Palamedes : fr. 479.—Trtcro-d sponding to our backgammon, in which the luck of the iciftoi might be counterireVTe'Ypajxp.a. ' The invention of irerrela. and KvfieLa was ascribed to Theuth, the acted or improved by a skilful handling Egyptian Hermes (Plat. Phaedr. 274 D). of the pieces. Hesych. says: dia^pei d£ ireTTeia Kvj3eias. 4v ij jj.kv yap TOOS Ktifiovs There are two forms of the game of irea&oL. (1) I n the irevre ypaiJ.fj.al each

player had five I/'TJ^OI, one placed on each of five lines. Between the two sets of

dvappiiTTovviv' tv b~k rrj Trerreia. aurb fj.dvov rds \p-q<povs neTaKivodcn. See further

on fr. 947, and Diet. Ant. I 695. ' At the Greek Ilium (Hissarlik), on dtj>' Upas, " t o try one's last chance": the plain of Troy, they showed the stone Poll. 9. 97). (2) The other form of on which Palamedes used to play Ktaooi. Tveaaai was called 7r6\cis, these being the Polemon fr. 32 (FHG III 125) IlaXajU)}Xupat- or squares on the board (ir\w6iov) : dovs eTnvo-qaaiJ,evov Kv/3eiai> Kai ireTrdav the pieces were Kives. In both games the kv I\i(fj els wapafitidiov \Lfj.ov KaraexovTos object probably was to hem in and capture rijv ffrpanliv \iOos e/ce? ebelKWTO, Ka6d the enemy's pieces (Diet. Ant. 11 11)' ILo\4/j.iiHf ivTopet, etp' ov iir^txaeuov' (J-). (].).—irevTrypa|i.|i.a appears to have been Orion (supr.) quotes the inscription on an first restored by Cobet (N.L. p. 775) for afjaKiov, containing 36 letters, one for the unclassical form irevrdypaixixa. The each square: eupe 6s /J.e Xiftov irapaLrule is thus stated by Phrynichus : irtv-ra.five lines was the iepa ypaix/iTj (laveiv TOP

fj.7]vov, irevTairrixv • grades

rd a els TO

430

430

Hesych. in p. 141 va

TrXdTriV vavTLK-fif. NavirXiij) irvpKaet.

The explanation of Hesych. is probably right, although there is not any other example of the adjective employed in this sense : vavKkqpla is used for voyage in fr. 143. It may be suggested, however, that the words would be admirably adapted to describe the equipment of Nauplius' boat, of which he was at once

owner and navigator in his coasting voyages (irapaTrX^ojf ras xc6/>as ras 'EXX^i'Sa? Apollod. epit. 6. 9). Cf. Lycophr. 1217 iropKevs SlKonrov o-£\fia vavaTokwv, where Tzetzes says: vvv hk TOV NCUJTTXCOP \tyei, iTetSrj els a\ievTiK<>i> aKatpos e'npa$ J?rXei.

Similarly Palamedes, when he went to Troy, T]ye...othe vadv oUre &v5pat dXX' &* irop&[iel OiaKi r y dSe\/f>ui ^TrXei'cre ( P h i l o s t r . her.

n . ri).

86

I04>0KAE0YI 431 Karrm Kpifiavrai, 431

cnr[£' OTTWS

criri^a. Tews cod. : corr. Dindorf

Apollod. epit. 6. 10 Leucus, having se4 3 1 Herodian vepl /IOV. W 23 TO, ets fa X-rjyovra 0rj\vKa, el I x 0 ' *>>* duced Meda, the wife of Idomeneus, el TAOUS Blxpovov, avvev•yoia-Q. And Lycophron, in his account of dpvtov. So0OK\^SfvNaf( the crime (1214—1225), which he ascribes corr. Schaefer) TnipKati ' K&TW... DindorPs correction (cr. n.) seems to the treacherous cunning of Nauplius, certain, although Blaydes preferred 0-71-1- includes the sons of Idomeneus in the vlSC ws, and Diels o-irlf ar' otV. What list of victims: 8s ovre T£KVUV tpelaer', was the subject of Kpi/xavTai we do not otire ovyya/iov | MijSas ddfmpros, Tjypiwknow, but I think no doubt can be felt fitvos 4>pivas, I ou K\euri$ripas Svyarpds. concerning the general character of the He adds that their death was shameful e context by anyone who will compare the and mysterious: Trdvras d' aviyvots x P<"" | \wfiaunv alKurfftnTas iv vctifi Krevei, present passage with Horn, x 468 ff. clis 5' &T' av fj xixXai. Tavwrlvrcpoi •/)£ irAeiai | 'Oynalov p60pov. Holzinger explains this [to mean that they were treated like %pKei £vt.Tr\r)i;w &u- xdra Kpi)UtvTaL Kre. Cf. Pind. fr. 161 oi pir fully slain to birds caught in a net. Can /tdrw Kapa 8e
432 OUTOS he y rjipe. rei^os 'Apyeicov crrparS /Cat jJL€Tp(t)V 4 3 2 . 1 Se y' yipe Maass: oireinTvy' eSpes V, OVTOS 8' eevpe V2 [ = manus altera 2 o-TaB/iuv Salmasius: ardBix-q 5' correctrix Victorii] L | 'Ap-yeioi coni. Maass V, (TTdBiJ.Ttv V2L Boissonade, a-raS/iris Maass, o-raBp-Sv r Herwerden | eiip-fi^ara : codd. : oplvfiaTa L. Dindorf,ffoa of Aratus. For the sources from (Petav. Uranol. p. 122.B) p. 28, i Maass which he drew see Diels, Doxogr. p. 17 5 I l X ^^ d d it S i 2 0j X foil. The name Tatius has probably been yovTa yap 'NavirXi.ov eiaayei 'o\>Tos...$tiaiv.' given to him erroneously, owing to a conAchilles, who lived at the end of the second fusion with the romance-writer. His or the beginning of the third century A.D., tloaywyi], from which the above extract was the writer of a commentary on the is taken, was first published from cod.

NAYFFAIOS

re rauras ovpdvid re 3 TauTos codd.: T' dvrds r' Mekler, irdcras Herwerden | versum post v. 8 transposuit •Scaliger, post v. 7 Mekler Laur. 28, 44 (L) by Petrus Victorius at Florence in 1567. The text of Victorius was reprinted by D. Petau in his Uranologium (Paris, 1630). The readings of cod. Vat. 191 (V) were first given by H. Keil in Philol. I 157, but a new critical edition based on a fresh collation of the same MSS is to be found in E. Maass, Commentariorum in Aratum reliquiae (1898). There is nothing to show whether this fragment comes from the Nauplius, under which title it is usually printed, or the Palamedes. Heath assigned it to the Nauplius, on the ground that Nauplius was not a character in the Palamedes : see however p. 81. The chief lists of the inventions of Palamedes are to be found in Gorg.

watchers in the night-season (im-voti 0iiXa{i)'; or ' trusty signs of the time of rest for watchers'—i.e. of the time at which one watch is to relieve another. [Or, with 0uXd|eis; '(he invented) the watches of the night—trusty signs.'] There are, however, serious difficulties in the traditional text which must now be considered in detail. It is hardly possible that Sophocles can have written the lines as they stand and in their present order; but with our existing material the task of restoration seems almost hopeless. 2 This v. interrupts the natural connection between reixos and rd^eis (see below); moreover, evp-fj/xara is extremely awkward in combination with -qvpe (or i
Palam. dvBpilnrivov filov irbpifxav i£ airdpov Kal KeKocpvt]^vov e£ 6.K6<J/J.OV, T d f e t S re iroXe/ULLKCLS evpwv fiiytarov eU 7r\eofeKrrjfj.arat vd/xovs re ypairroijs e'^airarwv rou? ve'ovs Kal irapa-ireWctiv, (patJKOlv rd^ets efyvpTjKevaL TroXefiLicds, ypdwitLTa., ap1.6fj.06s, /J.4rpa, crra^/iotis, irerrois, Kvflovs, fi.ov(nKT)V, v6/xtcryua, Trvpaotis. Schol. Kur. Or.

and between a-raff/xSiv and dpi.9iJ.Civ. T h e

attempts which have been made to cure these defects are not successful (see cr. nn.); and I am inclined to think that Posidonius—or whoever first compiled the quotation—strung together a list of the inventions from the play of Sophocles, without regard to the links which originally joined them. For the connexion of Palamedes with weights, numbers, and measures see Philostr. her. 11. 1 77-po ydp §T] Ua\ap.'r}dovs...ovde vof^ta/na i]v ovSe (rrad/xd Kal fxtrpa oi)5£ dptdfielv, as well as

the passages cited above. 3 Ta£eis is strangely joined with 432 (pacri 5e atirbv evpeiv Sk taught men how to marshal armies and how to know the heavenly signs. He [J.e'ytGrov Kal re\e&rarov Kal TrXetffTTjs d^Lov u0' wv djxa was the first also who showed how to ri/j-rj? e^evpe rd raKriKa, uib^eodai Kal rdv kvavrifjiv Kpelrrocnv elvai count from one to ten and so to fifty and weptf/p avTois. In the following sentence, to a thousand ; he showed how soldiers ws [lev ydp ij rpaytgbla epov' Tplv eKeivv discovered also how to measure terms cvyyeviadai. is a tragic fragment which Nauck has omitted from his collection.— and periods of the stars, trusty signs for

88

IOOKAEOYI v' erev^e 7T/oa>TOS, e f ivbs KOLK TO>V Se/c' av6i<; rjvpe TT

f a ? X^L' € ^ ^ 5 051 (TTparov eSet^e Kaver)vev ov SeSety/^eVa. i(f>7)vpe S' dcnpatv /xeV/aa fcai Treptcrr pond's, VTTVOV (f>v\d£eL<; 0' oia cn)\x.a.vTf\pi<x, vecov re Troip.avr'qpcnv ivOdkacrcnois dpKTOv ds re Kal /cwos \jjv)(pai> hvcriv.

10

4 KaKeiv V 2 L : /cd/ceo/os V, TaKeiv (puncto post a-rnxara deleto) Maass, Kal Kalv Blaydes | eVei/fe V 2 L : eferei'fe V, iravrwv 8 ?rcu|e irpGiTos Herwerden, Kaveir' £ra£e irpCiros is $evyos tea F . W . Schmidt | irpwrov L. Dindorf 6 8s X'X<" ei8i>s L : 6s x'^'<» evBvs V, Kal X'XIOCTTCS coni. Nauck prob. Maass | 8s aTparov V : 8s o-Tparw L, Kal 1 crrporoO Gomperz | ippvKTapia' primitus V | eis x^ '' °fr™s & (*v Qels ois Mekler) arpari} H e a t h | post hunc versum v. 9 virvov 0i/Xd£«s, els 6' ?u o-r)ixdvrpia transposuit Heath 7 sq. £5ei£e et ity-tfipe sedem mutasse suspicatur Nauck 9 0i/Xd£eis 8' ofa scripsi: 0uXd£et trriSoa V (i\a^i Se'ia Maass, i5Xafi mcrra Wagner, 0t5Xa£i (TTIXTTJ-A M. Schmidt, 0i5Xa£iP ^irSXa Keil, 0uXd£ets, ariKTa L. Campbell 1O yefip Blomneld: vaSiv c o d d . I voi/j.avTTJpeta c o n i . M a a s s — l a c u n a m i n t e r ei50i)s e t 8s ( v e l Kai) i n v . 6 s t a t u i t , c e t e r a i n h u n c o r d i n e m d i s p o s u i t H . K e i l : 1 2 4 5 7 8 3 11 9 [O. i l l u d m a l u i t G o m p e r z : 2 7 8 3 9 10 11 1 (avrbs 8') 4 5 6 . e q u i d e m v e r s u s s i c t r a n s p o s u e r i m , v . 6 c u m N a u c k i o aliis r e s t i t u t o : 1 4 5 6 9 7 2 3 8 10 1 1 : sed m e n d u m altius latere suspicor r a v T a s (cr. n . ) m u s t e i t h e r b e d e i c t i c , o r — ovd' Saovs irbSas elxc elSbros, elwep dpil i k e t h e L a t i n iste (Me)—' t h o s e w e l l 8)j.eii/ fi^i TjTrLiTTaTo; T o the same effect k n o w n ' : Plat. Men. 76 A iwiTedov Ka\ets Aristides I.e.: 0: 5£ roaovTov direXxov Tov TI Kal...ffrepedv, olov ravra TCL ev TOXS o~ij/j.TravTas av avrois dpidfj-Tjaai, yj Tas vaus yewfierpiais; H . suggested the substitudirofrai Ttves TJffav as yyov, war' oi)5' otroo'oi tion of raKrds. rives cturots 01 ^3atri\e?s 6 Te Ayap.4fj.vojv 4 ff. KaKttv'. The pronoun must Kal 6 MevAaos IjueXXoc ebpijaeiv, where refer to what follows: and these things he is professedly quoting Plato.—In v. 6 too —The reference in these lines is not the readings of Nauck and Gomperz (see to number merely, but to the use of cr. nn.) may be provisionally accepted, number for the purpose of military disbut the corruption probably lies deeper. cipline. Cf. Dio Chrys. 13. 21 i-ireiS^ 8k Keil held that the remains of two separate rovs Te #XXous e8i5a^e ypd/ifiara Kal roi/s lines had been combined in one. 'Arpeibas SifKov HTL irp&rovs, Kal ixerd. TCIV 7 can hardly have been written by ypafipidTtoiv Toiis (ppvKToiis HTTUIS XPV dve\etvSophocles as it stands. Nauck's transKal dpiBiielv rb TKTJBOS, iirel Tpbrepov oi/K position of 88ei|e and €<|>r)CpE would be ySeo~av oit8e Ka\&s dpt,8fxr\o~at. Tbv 6x"Xov, an improvement, but even then the line uiairep 01 iroi/j.e'ves ra irpiftara, where it is suspiciously tame. Platt [C.Q. v 66) will be observed that exactly as here the thinks that the strengthening of the numbering is mentioned together with the second verb by composition with a preposiuse of fire-signals. Aesch. fr. 182 Kal tion was characteristic of Sophocles, and Tai-idpxas Kal o-rpardpxas Kal eKarovrapxas compares O.T. 1351 gppvro Kavtauae. frai^a. Plat. rep. 522 D ridicules the For SeiKvivai of invention cf. Ant. capacity of Agamemnon as a general, if 300. he did not know how to count: fj OVK 8 ao-rpuv |X€Tpa, • probably = spalia, ivvevbr/Kas, 8TI (j>-qalv (sc. Palamedes) not as "distances," but as the " t e r m s " dpi.8iJ.bv eipiiv rds Te TO£«S TI} o-Tparoire'Sij) or spaces of time between the risings and KaTaaTTJcai iv 'IXiy Kal ^apidixr/Gai vavs settings, etc., as measuring the seasons' Te Kal rdXXn Travra, us 7rp6 TOV dvapi8p.ri(J.). The meaning is then more exactly Ttw ivTwv Kal TOV 'Ayafie'fivovos, iis lotKev, defined by irEpids, 'periods' or

NAYFTAIOI

89

* revolutions.' TrepuiTpttpuiandirtpio-Tpotp-q tember when Arcturus begins to appear were scientific terms in astronomy: Plut. as a morning-star,—the "coming round" de facie in orb. lun. 18 p. 931 A 8c ydp 6 or "return" of Arcturus (O.T. 1137). TfXios TrepuCuv KJJKXOV dyet Kal wepurTptipei But it would more naturally mean " the ire pi T V o-eXr/vr/v. turning" of the Great Bear round the pole. Track. 130 S.pKTovds. ' If a season be days after the vernal equinox (according denoted, as the context suggests, o-Tpo
433 Se

VVKTX

4 3 3 Phot. lex. p. 150, 9 KarovXdda. 2o0o/c\^s Nau7r\ttfj* l4irevxofJ.on ...Karov\d$i? TT\V KarlWoucrcLV Kal Kareipyovcray. Kal ^|oi5A?/s SIKT), r\ 4£eipl;eais. ot 5£ rrj iravuXeOpip tcro/jL^fr] rots " E M ^ t e • od\ov yap rb 6\tdpiov 'Kali/ icora Trp69etris a.6%t) KaraiylSas f^outTa? Kal aucrTpo<pas dv^fxojv ' dWetv ydp TO avarpifyeiv ' "O/x-qpos (perhaps with reference to T 200). I have added rj before Karaiyldas. The substance of this, but not the reference to Sophocles, occurs also in Eustath. Od. p. 1769, 32 (Ael. et Paus. fr. 225 Schw.). The word was evidently obscure to the Alexandrians, and it is possible that even Sophocles, who no doubt used it with a traditional meaning, would have been puzzled to

rfj /cctrovAaSi

explain its history. Photius gives us the choice of four explanations, of which the third at any rate (' dark, because scars are black ') may be discarded. The note of Photius is abbreviated and confused by Hesych. 11 p. 440 KarovXdda- rijv KaTik\ov(ra.v Kal etpyovaav. ($£\TLOV d& TI\V KarbXeSpov (TrainJiXeBpof conj. M. Schmidt) /cat (TV
OVK

ixGTpa.

duaxavev, OVK dfj.apvyal j /XTJVTIS' ovpavbdcv Si ,u
I04>0KAE0YI Xddi.' Part of this scholium has found its way into Etym. M. p. 497, 25, and Etym. Gud. p. 308, 19. But we cannot leave out of account Hesych. II p. 440 KareiXada • ijfJ.4pa x«i"fp'"i), or II p. 27 et\as' d-yAas. ij irvKvi). dya.8-tj. aKoreivq, where wvKvq and CKOTUVT] seem to refer to a lemma ci\ds. The word may therefore mean a thick, dark night (spissis noctis se condidit umbris Verg. Aen. 2.

621), as Buttmann, Lexil. p. 271, explained it, throughKanCKuv 'to wrap up.' Etymologically it would then be connected with offXos' fleecy' (land), oi)Xa/u6s, ov\ds ' a wallet.' The last explanation of Photius is only a specialized application of the first (fr. 70 n.). Campbell compares Shakesp. Macb. 1.5-51 'Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the night.'

434 TO)

yap

TrpdcrcrovTL fjivpia

vvt; i ev TTadovra Qaripa.

davelv.

4 3 4 . 2 sq. lacunam indicavi | eS iraBbvra. T) 'ripa, (S, 7/Tcpa M, eW ertpa A) daveiv codd., S-qripa 8ave1v H. Grotius, eC irafibvTa 5' ii'ripa 8avei Heath davdroto Kfxqp.evov, ovV uirakvl-as. I 4 3 4 Stob. flor. 104. 3 (IV p. 920, 13 cannot help suspecting, however, that the Hense) 2O0OK\&WS N J general sense required is that which has been fully illustrated by Headlam on Nauck accepted eviraOovvra 8' np 8a.vei from F. W. SchmiHt (Meineke Aesch. Ag. 544,—sorrow so intense that relief from it is desired even at the price of had proposed evwaSown 5' oix Ipws immediate death. AddDioChr.68.2. But Bavelv, and Gomperz had improved in that case something must have dropped Heath's conjecture with imipa for Tfripa). o u t : e.g. vO% ecri, < fxb%Qtav d' ijv TTOT' This was rendered by Jebb: 'When dvawavXav Xd/377, dpearbv > eS iraSbvra 8aa man is in trouble, one night seems an Tipa BaveXv. This seems to have been age; but, when he is enjoying himself, the meaning required by Bamberger, who day comes all too soon' (lit. 'surprises conjectured PI)|. eft iraBbvT' ev 5' 4a.ve?, 617. For 09ai«i>, which, if not here, is and Herwerden eS Tacrxovri. Si /iia /j.vpia. nowhere found in the extant remains of Sophocles, cf- Horn. A 451
435 inroTrvpovs 435

Aristid. I p. 259 (421 D.) irolas

These words undoubtedly refer to the

Nau7rX/ou 7ra7as virotrdpovs, cos ^(f>rj 2o<po~ beacons by means of which Nauplius K\T}S, dlioc r% TvpKa'Cq. raiirij irapapaXelv lured the Greek fleet on to the rocks at

{i.e. to the destruction by fire of the temple at Eleusis) ;

Caphereus. The story was an invitation to the phrase-maker; and the words

NAYT1AI0Z quoted may be illustrated by Eur. Hel. 1130 AlyaLcus T' evaKotoiv aKrah \ d6\iov dcripa Xd/i^as. Anth. Pal. 9. 429 0 ij/eiJaTijs S' virb VVKTO. Ko0r)pei?)s dirb j irvpaSs, 9. 289 wvpirbs ore

xpedarrjs x^ov^ Svofepuirepa •qipe ai\a.. SeD. Med. 661 ignefallaci nocilurus Argis | Nauplius, Ag. ^91 ;'« jfl-ta ducitperfida dassemface.

436 4 3 6 Hesych. 1 p. 207 deipeos 7r6Xe,u,os. kind: see Introductory Note. Thus dvSpetoy, 6 7rp6s rota dvdpas. So0o/cX^s Sarpedon's compliment in Horn. II 492 Nau7rX/if). To the same effect Phot. ed. 7ro\efj.L
437 cogent inference is possible, but the locality (for which see on fr. 888) suits 'ATTOWWVIOS 5e vabv (pTjalv eTvat ir\i)IKOI> Be rives avrb <pa<jlv, refers to the celebration at the Elymnion on 6 Zet)s TT} "Tipa exel avveyevero. fj.eof the rite of the lepbs ya/ios, as also at ixv-qrai Kal 2o0o/c\i5s ' irpbs irirpais "EKvthe Euboean Ocha : Steph. Byz. p. 362, s' (fr. 888), Kai iv NoiurXty 'vviupmbv 16 s.v. Kapvaros. For a list of the places at which the cult was established see Nauck conjectures that only the words Frazer, Golden Bough1, 1 p. 228 ; Gruppe, of fr. 888 belong to the Nauplius. No Gr. Myth. p. ii34 9 . 437

Schol. Ar. Pac. 1126 KaWi-

orpaTOS cp-rful T6TTOV Euj3oias TO "EXVIXVIOV.

438 4 3 8 Pollux io. 134 Kal oKKta Si. ra BPV, Apollon. lex. Horn. p. 315, Hesych. 7n;5aXta ev Nau7rXtaj wvoiiatre (sc. Sopho- 11 p. 243), or the lading-plank (Monro). cles) irapa rb 'Op-rjpov (f 350) ' f earbv In Ap. Rhod. 4. 1609 oKK-qwv is certainly efptiknaiov.' not the rudder, but.we have no sufficient reason to discredit the authority of Pollux. The critics are not agreed whether e<j>6\Kaiov in Horn, is the rudder (so schol. Dindorf arbitrarily prefers oX/ceia.

92

ICXfrOKAEOYZ NAYIIKAA H nAYNTPIAI

The alternative titles are clearly established by a comparison of E u s t a t h . Od. p . 1553, 63 ^dXia-ra Be, fyacrLv, iirefieXijOriiTav vcrrepov aipi(TTtKri<; TroXecov fiep Kocvfj AaKeBaifiiovioi, flacrcXewv Be 6 fj,eya<; 'AA-e^avSpo?, IBKOTWV Be "2,o<poic\f)<; 6 rpayucos' 09 ical ore, <paal, TO? YI\vvTpla<; eSiSaavee, TO rfj<; Nai/crivcaas irpoawirov aipa Trat^ovarji; viroKpuvofievo^ lo")(ypw<; Be eafya'ipiaev (sc. Xofoickrjs), ore TTJV Navcwcdav KaOfjKe. Cf. E u s t a t h . / / . p . 381, IO %o<poie\rj<; 7repuiBeTai...8eiv6<; elvat afyaipiaai, a>? r\ KCLT avrbv iBr)\(oae BpafiaTticr) Naixrt/caa.

From these passages we also obtain the interesting information that Sophocles abandoned his usual practice by appearing himself as an actor in the title-rdle. Since he took the part of a woman, his fioKpocpcovia was less of an objection than usual1. Though such stories must be accepted with reserve, it is probably safe to infer that the Nausicaa was an early play. Philyllius, a poet of the Old Comedy, wrote a TlXvvTpiai rj Navcwcda (i 784 K.), and Eubulus, of the Middle, a Navaiicaa (11 188 K.). The plot was of course taken from the sixth book of the Odyssey, and its simplicity is remarkable ; for it may be considered certain that Sophocles followed the Homeric narrative as closely as the nature of his art allowed. Cf. vit. Soph. 12 rovs re jap fiv&ovs (f>epet ica-r vi'yyo<; rov irotrjrov KOX rrjv 'OSvcrcreiav & ev 7roXXot? Bpdfiacriv airoypcKpeTcu2. Ahrens makes the

plausible suggestion that Athena spoke the prologue and explained the situation. There is no reason to suppose that the story was recast in order to introduce a love-motive, and, unless we make the improbable assumption of a change of scene, the action cannot have reached to the departure of Odysseus from Phaeacia. Fr. 781 probably belongs to this play, as is generally supposed; but there is less likelihood that Welcker was right in his conjecture with regard to fr. j66. There is no justification for the suggestion first made by Casaubon3 that the Nausicaa was a satyr-play. Pausanias (1. 22. 6) mentions a picture by Polygnotus representing Odysseus approaching Nausicaa and her maidens from the river-bank, and from this a vase-painting of the same subject now at Boston is supposed to be reproduced. Polygnotus, it is suggested4, had painted it as a votive tablet for Sophocles himself. 1

See Introductory Note to Thamyras, I p. 178. H. Schreyer, Nausikaa, Anh. p. 135 f., thinks that the Nausicaa of Sophocles was the first piece of a trilogy, in which the Phaeaces was the second, and perhaps the Niptra the third. 3 Schweighauser's Athenaeus, IX p. 43. 4 See Gruppe in Bursians Jahresb. c x x x v n 565. 2

NAYIIKAA

93

439 Te vrjcrai \ivoyf.v€i<; T 439 439

\woyeveis : vwir\vvei% vulgo ante Bekkerum

Pollux 7. 45 eirel Kal 6 iirev-

Sirris early iv ry T&V fioij\oiro nal rovr(p 0atfXy bvri, Xrjirrtov K\£O\JS TVKvvTpuZv '

iroXXiix x/»jff«> Harts rig dvbfian fioyBeiv aOrb iK rthv "ZtoipoiriirXovs...eTrevSiTa'i.'

It may be conjectured that these words are taken from a passage describing the skill of the Phaeacian women: cf. Horn, i) 108 oVffov $aii)/ces irepl irdvrav tSpi.es dvdpwv I ...ct)s de yvvouKes l&r&v l & rexvrjijpevas i
vi^o-oi is loosely used for ixpaiveiv. The process of spinning, being preparatory to that of weaving, was apt to be regarded as a part of the same operation rather than as a distinct art: see Plat. polit. 282 c ff. Cf. Homer's use of iipvriTos: here Soph, probably had in mind t) 96 7r^7r\oi \e7rr0i itivvTjroi f3t(i\riaTO, tpya t\ 107 Kaippovaatajv

yvvaiK&i'.—Xivoytveis: 5' dOovtojv &Tro\et-

/3eTdi iypbi> iXtuov,—of the Phaeacian women at work.—orevSuTas. The women of the Homeric age wore only one garment, the JT^TTXOS, which, though

generally of wool, might also, as we have seen, in the case of a more luxurious taste be made from the more costly linen (Iw. Mueller, Privatalt?, p. 82). It is best to assume that Soph, here follows the Odyssey, and that eirevSirrjs was a word of general application, like etfj.a, vestis, or our 'robe.' Studniczka, however (Beitrage, p. 28), understanding that the Ionian tunic was the subject of reference, read vireyStiTas, i.e. linen undergarments—usually known as \irihvLa. in the case of women—worn beneath a woollen cloak. Cf. Strabo 734. If he is right, the error is earlier than the ultimate source of Pollux. Moeris p. 213, 27 gives ^irecSt/Tiis as the Hellenistic equivalent of the Attic xiT^v '• cf' Ael. Dionys. fr. 325 Sch. The upshot of Pollux's remarks is that eirei/5iirr]s was later in common use, but was not found in Attic. He then quotes exceptions from Soph., pseudo-Thespis (TGFp. 832), and Nicochares. These examples show that it was not a word of precise meaning.

440 I

iirapav 44O

avappoif

Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 120, 28 avap-

jLlOl

ti 7raA.iv

in view of the newly discovered evidence

poipSelv ' "O/XTjpos (11 104) niv TO dvappoOK\TIS Se roviavriov

IOIKCV<eV>Nau-

ffi/cda• '6'x^jUa...7raXip.' T h e cod. gives ioLKiv airUa 6 x W ixeirapiiavxa., whence Reitzenstein restored as above. Hesych. I p . 181 dvapoider avappoipii. AttrxiiXos XaXafiivLcus (fr. 217) dvrl rod iiawvetv. "Oprjpos Sc (/J. 104) avairlvei Kal dv(tppo0€i jtterd TTOLOO ijxov (dvapocp^j/xara TrotoDvrjXovcc"^- '• coir. H . ) . Kal ZO0OKX?)S iv NavaiKaa dvrl rod dva. < p > piwrei. Schol. H Horn. p. 104 rives de rr\v \ii,w irepX TOO dvappiwret (ra^av. Eustath. Od.

p. 1719, 41. The interpretation, 'throws up (the ball) with a whirr,' for which H. quoted Pollux 9. 106, must be abandoned

Reitzenstein holds that the words describe the action of Charybdis, and that dvappoipSci does not contrast with but rather explains eirapav. Thus, whereas dvappoifSS^Tv in Homer is ' to suck in,' here it signifies ' to vomit forth.' He adds that in fx 236 ff. dveppoi[15ri£eie, and that Sophocles' words are intended to correspond to [x 437 6(pp' e^e^aeiev

oirlffattj j Iffrbv Kal

rpbiriv atrrts. o)(T)(i,o, then, is the object of iirdpav and refers to the spars on which Odysseus buoyed himself (e^o^evos 8' (•niroh

(pepd/xTjv: cf. € 3 7 1 a/j.(f>' hi

Sovpan

94

SO^OKAEOYZ

fi, JS iinrov eXativaiv). For the word Reitzenstein quotes the epigram

/cG/ia 5' OICTT' before o^rj/ta, avappotfiSel irdXw would correspond to £ 430 iraXippb6i.ov Si )U.v afrris | wXij^ev itrcaainevov, in Ael. nat. an. 12. 45 'Aplova KVKX4OS vlbv I iic'ZiKeXovTreXdyovstruxrev&xV/JjaT^c Tt\kov Si /uv £/u/3a\e ir6vTtp, and the action of the returning wave hurling (of the dolphin). It follows from this that Odysseus back into the deep sea might Odysseus must have told his story at conseem to justify the grammarian's comment. siderable length, as in Homer. I suggest, In any case, it appears unnecessary to as an alternative, that the words formed follow E. Schwartz, who proposed oxel part of an account in which the arrival of fj.d\a I iirapav yovxy S' d. ir., in assuming Odysseus on the Phaeacian coast was a further corruption. described (e 424 ff.). If we might supply

44I 441 Pollux 10. 52 '4<JTL Se TO&vofia diri)vi) drawn by mules. So in Apoll. *7) Xap,irt]VT) iv rrj XotpoKXiovs NautR/cct /cat Rhod. 3. 841 Medea drives to the shrine of iv roh MevdvSpov 'AXieuaiv (fr. 29, III Hecate in an diri)vr) with her twelve hand-

12 K.). The form is established by Posidippus fr. 10 (ill 338 K.) in Poll. 10. 139 ffKrivds, oxovs, I pio-novs, doprds, -rdxa-va, Xa/iTTTJras, ovovs. Hesych. Ill p . 11 XafJ-TTTjvT]' elSo

% di)} r % j p a/xd^Tjs cod.) irepi(pa.iiovs ^atriXiK^s : simi larly Phot, and Suid., who add ?) piStov (i.e. raedd) Trepttpavis, 6 etrnv apfia (TKctraaTliV. a covered waggon, or state-coach, or royal chariot—which is exactly an njvT]. j

maidens who have yoked it to the mules, and then back again, with two of them beside her, while the others run behind, holding to the body of the wain (869). See also n. on Eur. Phoen. 847, Headlam on Aesch. Ag. 1023. Pausanias (5. 19. 9), describing the paintings on the chest of Cypselus at painting O l p i a , s a y s : irapdivovs Si iirl iificdvajv, Olympi Se iiriKei/i^vriv KdXvfifi.a iirl TTJ Ktipakfi, TTJV Se i ' re vo/xt^ovini> elvai KO.1 rty BepdiXativovffav eVi TOUS irXvvotis.

Nausicaa in the Odyssey rides in an

NIOBH

Horn. D, 602—617 is our earliest authority for the story of Niobe, who vaunted herself against Leto, boasting that she was the mother of many fair children, while Leto had borne only two. Apollo and Artemis slew the sons and daughters of Niobe; and she herself was turned into stone, imprisoned amongst the rocky crags of Mt Sipylus, where the tears that bedewed her bosom were perennial streams of running water. The legend of Niobe's transformation is undoubtedly to be explained by a certain configuration of rock on Mt Sipylus, which appeared to the people of the locality to resemble a weeping woman. Pausanias, who was a native of the district, states {1. 21. 3) that on a nearer approach the illusion disappeared ; and exactly the same account is given by Quintus, who no doubt also wrote with the authority of an eye-witness (i. 293—306). Although several suggestions have been put forward, the site

NAYIIKAA—NIOBH

95

has not been identified with certainty by modern travellers : see Frazer, Pausanias, in pp. 552—555. Sophocles twice refers incidentally to Niobe in her stony solitude as a type of unceasing sorrow: see El. 150—153, Ant. 823—831. Homer gives no hint of Niobe's parentage, nor any indication that she dwelt elsewhere than in the neighbourhood of Sipylus. Later tradition was unanimous in making her the daughter of the Lydian Tantalus, and wife of the Theban Amphion. The death of the children, therefore, took place at Thebes ; but the schol. Townl. on Horn, fl 6021 gives the important information that in Sophocles' play Niobe returned to Lydia after her children had perished. The appearance of the same feature in the account of Apollodorus (3. 47) tempts us to infer that he was also follow ing Sophocles, when he related that Artemis shot down the daughters in the house, and Apollo killed all the sons while hunting on Cithaeron. Hygin. fab. 9 2is to the same effect, except that he does not mention Cithaeron , for which he3 substitutes in silva. Apollodorus made one son and one daughter survive, and Hyginus one daughter only. It is, however, hardly credible that Sophocles assented to a mitigation of Niobe's suffering by allowing any of the children to escape. Ovid, whose narrative (Met. 6. 146—312) is more detailed than any of the other extant versions, shows a true poetic instinct in leaving no survivors; and Pausanias (2. 21. 10), in the spirit of an historical student, finds the authority of Homer convincing. It is not possible to ascertain whether any of Ovid's rhetoric is derived from a tragic source ; but it is worth notice that, according to him, the sons were struck down by Apollo, not while hunting on Cithaeron, but in the palaestra, where they were practising athletic exercises. The daughters were killed afterwards, as they stood mourning by their dead brothers, after another defiant speech of Niobe. Here at least, as we shall see, Ovid followed the order of events in Sophocles. For reasons which are sufficiently obvious, Ovid felt himself obliged to describe the transformation of Niobe as following immediately after the death of her children and husband, as she sank amidst their lifeless bodies and at once began to stiffen with grief. But, since it was necessary to take into account the Sipylus-tradition, he imagined Niobe as continuing to weep when she had become 1 T) 5i (Tvixipopa airris (sc. NIO/3T;S), cis fiiv rives iv AvSiq., us Be tvioi iv 0?}/3ais. 2O0OK\?)S roi'S pey Traidas iv ©>j/3cui diro\ia0ai, po avri)v els AvSiav.

Similarly Eustath. II. p. 1367. " • - The words in monte Sipylo are bracketed by M. Schmidt, and must be due to an error. 3 He gives Amphion and Chloris as the names ot the survivors, but neither of these is included in the list of the fourteen children which appears a few lines before.

96

IOOKAEOYI

entirely stone, and then as carried off to her native land by the rush of a mighty whirlwind1. The language recalls a passage of Plutarch (cons. Apoll. 28, p. 116 C), which is founded on some poetical account of Niobe's end : el yovv r\ Nioflrj Kara TOU? ixvdow; •wpaye.ipov elye. TTJV viroXij-^riv TavrrjV OTO ical fj

8a\e8ovTL ftLa> fiXdcrTaiv re TeKvcov do<; opicaa

ftpidoiieva

yXvicepbv

reXevTtjcei, OVK av OVTO)<; ehv dircoXeiav TTJV

•XaXeTTcordTrjv.

Welcker claimed the quotation for Sophocles,

but Bergk included it in the lyric adespota (fr. go,)2, and Nauck in the same class of tragic fragments (fr. 373). Note that, according to Plutarch, Niobe prayed to the gods that she might perish. It can hardly be accidental that the same touch reappears in Apollodorus, with the difference that there her prayer to Zeus to be turned into stone is made after her return to Sipylus3. Having already recognized points of contact between Apollodorus and Sophocles, we might suggest that Niobe's prayer came from the tragic poet; but the link is too weak to strengthen materially the title of Sophocles to the authorship of the lyrics quoted by Plutarch. Welcker thought that the appearance of Amphion was a dramatic necessity in a play which described the downfall of his family. He supposed therefore that, as in Ovid, he committed suicide, and that his death was announced by a messenger who came out of the house4. When the death of the sons took place at a distance from the palace—on Mt Cithaeron it may be—the news was brought to Niobe by their 7raiBaycory6<;; and shortly afterwards the daughters were killed on the stage. Welcker's acute guess has been confirmed by the new fragments (fr. 442 ff.) published in the second volume of the Oxford Papyri (1897)5. In the first of these one of the daughters is represented calling for aid. In the second another, who is not 1

El validi circumdata turbine venti \ in patriam rapta est (310). There is a

recent examination of Ovid's sources by Altenburg in Philol. LXIV '284 ff., who rejects decisively the assumption of Ehwald and Ribbeck that a {nr&Sea-is to Sophocles' play was one of the chief of them. 2 Cf. Wilamowitz, Tr. Gr.fragg. p. 24. 3 3. 47 T\K(V els 2iirv\ov, KO.KU Ad eb^antvq TTJV ixop<j>rjv eh \t9ov ^er^aXe. 4 His death is otherwise accounted for by Pausan. 9. 5. 8 and by Hygin./a*. 9, where after the death of his children he attacks the temple of Apollo. In Lucian de salt. 41 he goes mad. 6 Blass {Lit. Centralbl. 1897, 334) was the first to assign these frs. to the Niobe of Sophocles: see n. in loc.

NIOBH

g?

yet wounded, is compared to a colt let loose from the yoke. The situation has been ingeniously analysed by Robert in Herm, xxxvi 368 ff.1 The first Niobid died on the stage, but the Nurse, who followed her out, had her body carried into the palace by servants. Niobe appeared shortly after the arrival of the second daughter, who died in her arms. Then she learnt2 from a messenger that her sons had been slain on Cithaeron . In fr. 448 Plutarch has quoted an extract from this messenger's speech. It is not pretended that this reconstruction rests on a secure foundation; but it is consistent with the meagre indications afforded by the evidence. A more difficult question is raised by the longer fragment published among the Oxyrhyucluis Papyri (frs. 574, 575), which contains a speech of Tantalus, referring first to the fate of Niobe, and afterwards to his own misfortunes. So much at least appears to be certain, although some doubts have been expressed3. Moreover, a 4strong case has been made in favour of Sophoclean authorship , and the first editors and some other critics treated it as an extract from the Niobe. But, although Sophocles transferred the heroine to Lydia at the end of his play, it is hard to see how 5such a speech can have belonged to it. Wecklein's expedient , that the fragment is taken from a messenger's speech, is scarcely tenable: to attribute the verses to another than Tantalus does violence to their natural trend, and the arrival of a messenger from Lydia is inconsistent with the requirements of the situation. Are we then to suppose a change of scene? I think that Robert was justified in his vigorous protest that an epilogue enacted in Lydia is absolutely excluded by the conditions of the Greek stage. How, for example, was the chorus—composed of Theban women, as Welcker thought—to cross the sea? Niobe herself (he might have added) was conveyed by a storm-wind; but that circumstance does not help to preserve the continuity of the action. And, if these objections were not decisive, the assumption of a double catastrophe, the earthquake at Sipylus immediately succeeding the disaster at Thebes, would be hardly credible. It should be added that G. Hermann, relying on the statement of the Homeric scholiast, proposed to s1 refer to Sophocles an obscure passage in Arist. poet. 18. 1456 16, where, in distin1

Revised and separately issued as Niobe, ein Marmorbild aus Pompeji, Halle, See the review by R. Engelmann in B.ph. W. 1904, 1430. Meineke, Anal. Alex. p. 146, showed that Euphorion mentioned Cithaeron in this connexion. 3 I cannot agree with Robert that the verses may have nothing to do with Niobe. 4 See note in loc. 5 B. ph. W. 1900, 508. p. 11. 7 19032

98

IO*OKAEOYZ

guishing the structure of epic and tragedy, the critic remarks that dramatists who have attempted to include a multiplicity of stories in a single tragedy have failed conspicuously; and gives as an instance those who, unlike Aeschylus, have taken as their subject the whole tale of Niobe. The Oxyrhynchus fragment might certainly be used in support of Hermann's guess, but more convincing evidence is required before we can attribute to Sophocles such an artistic lapse. The Homeric scholium, as Robert remarks, admits of a simple and obvious explanation : either Niobe announced her own departure, or her destiny was proclaimed in a divine eirt^aveia. What then is to be made of the Oxyrhynchus fragment? Wilamowitz1, agreeing that it referred to Niobe, forbore to decide between Aeschylus and Sophocles. But the arguments of Blass in favour of Sophocles have not been refuted. Now that we have better reason to credit the existence of the Tantalus of Sophocles, I suggest that the new fragment should be assigned to that play, and have endeavoured to show in the Introductory Note that it is suitable to the circumstances of the story. Valckenaer, followed by Welcker, Dindorf, and Wilamowitz2, attributed to Sophocles the verses printed by Nauck among the adespota (fr. 7 ) : j

x

p

daKirovcra teal •^rv-^ovaa ical irovtp TTOVOV etc VVKTOS dWaacrovcra TOV /J,e9' f)fj,epav.

I see no reason for preferring Sophocles to Aeschylus, even if they alone are to be considered. 442 Jere

XO.

rfjs ff 6/JLO(rir6po[v

d

KOPH. 442.

[

etcre[[ ^^jj nXevpov p ] a Trj/Ji TTOKVCTTOVOV cr[ [ 1 evff Gr-H

5

2 littera ante a vel X vel S vel K esse potest

4 4 2 This and the three following fragments (Brit. Mus. Pap. DCXC) were first published by Grenfell and Hunt in the second series of their Greek Papyri (Oxford, 1897), p. 14. They formed part

of the lining of a mummy-case, and the handwriting is assigned to the third century B.C. Blass (Lit. Centralbl. 1897, 334) first pointed out that they seemed to belong to the Niobe of Sophocles : the

1

GGA 1900, 34. Tr. Gr. fr. p. 26, without giving reasons. but cf. Aesch. Pers. 1042. 2

T&vtf irbvov recalls Ai. 866 etc.,

NIOBH

99

]e/cetcre T17S' e p ]es Se fJLV)(a\a Taprapd 6rorororoTor]oi 7roSa Ka.ra.-ujr\^o> JaX.wcroju.ai 8e

XO. (?)

Xia

crr[joe(£ e t

[ p r[ Swcrco y [ 7 e certum esse iudicat Bl (u Gr-H) 8 cu Gr-H 11 va Gr-H, cu vel Xi Bl ' 15 craw Gr-H

Gr-H

9 dX

identification is of course not certain, but fore, must be the subject of it is highly probable, and no other has and dffrox'fi)- But, since v. 1 apparently been suggested. belongs to the lyrics of the Niobid, the The same critic in Rh. Mus. LV 96 ff. adoption of Blass's supplements involves the difficulty of reconciling an address to published a revised text after a minute Artemis in v. 3 with a reference to her in examination of the originals, and his the third person in v. 2. There is perresults have been incorporated above. haps another possibility,—that v. 3 f. are As regards the order of the fragments, Blass addressed to the Niobid, and that woS' thinks it possible that 445 might have 4He\a6i>eis should be written, followed by stood above 443 and 444 above 442. Soj/j.a.TOJi' r ' a(p€Lfx&r} (or 4£u)irLos) KaraThen, 443, n might have preceded 444, aTox^Vj if tcaTa&Toxi-feffSai might be 1, so that the four fragments would have understood as ' to be shot at.' Then v. 2 formed a continuous text. It will be obmight run m> 5' dXAo...6|8i[j. Blass comserved that Robert's reconstruction, which pleted v. 4 with elX VTTO 797s T&pTapa Kp^TTT€tS | v. 2 with Kopris, and v. 3 with T^vS' ai 5^ l ® ' x 5p6/jLij>, and begins v. 4 with oid'. It is 8 iroSa KaTairTtjijco should be added assumed that d
7—2

IOOKAEOYI

IOO

443

eXeatX.[

£\

. . o-crocreicr/ce[ SeTravro^ y . pe/xoi £t
]'

\ \

4 4 3 . 2 7op Gr-H 8 air Gr-H 9 o sequitur vel T vel { Blassio iudice: 6 dederant Gr-H IO ad initium e . . . iff Gr-H 4 4 3 5 < p. > e \ « u indicates lyrics. 7 Blass recognizes ij/ce 7rais
IO < T I 7a/) irpbs Seou>s rjfuW-r)a-<6,jit\v;> is suggested by Eur. l.T. 478 ri 7ap | 7rp6s rods (r^^oi'TOS 5eoi)s a/u\Xa;

J

444 revovaiai

y

vniprepov

ei TTWXOS ws U7ro

dprtcos /cat cruyyov[

[ 444.

1 xec Gr-H

4 4 4 1 oiVfa occurs in Trach. 911. For the word see Wilamowitz on Eur. Her. 337. 2 The shortness of the line indicates that it was an exclamation,—of the chorus, according to Blass. 3 recalls Ant. 631 T6.% eiebixeada. fiav•rtusv inriprepov. 4 7r£Xos as two fuyoO occurs in Eur. Or. 45, where Herwerden restored iirb from Eubulus (fr. 75, n 190 K.) ap. Athen. 108 B. vvb is adopted by Wecklein and

3 y (vel ai) Bl Murray, and the present passage confirms it. Robert's view that the comparison is applied to the flight of one of the daughters might be supported by Eur. Bacch. 1056. 5 dpTicos is characteristic of Sophocles, in whose plays it occurs more than 30 times: see Rutherford, New Phryn. p. 71, Starkie on Ar. Vesp. n . The fact that it is not found in Aeschylus is significant. 6 4>opr|i. Blass thinks the word was used as in El. 715, 752.

NIOBH

101

445 TOTOTOTOTOT^

ayp . v(j>co[_ XXo[

445.

1 ta/x/j. Gr-H

6 aXX Gr-H | post hunc v. duo versus omnino deleti

4 4 5 5 Blass suggests nV air' dir' arrival of a messenger. aypov
446 elvcu r a s dvyarepas 446

Schol. Eur. Phoen. 159 KOX

KCLI urovs apcreva<;.] (fr. 52 J.) mentioned twenty, although

2O0OK\T)S £v ^\Lof3rj iirra
{i.e. the daughters of Niobe) KO.1 TOUS apcreras (rat i'
had spoken of nineteen, Sappho (fr. 143) of eighteen, and Alcman made the number ten: see Aelian, I.e. Gruppe, p. 125r0, accounts for the differences between twelve and fourteen and between nineteen and twenty by the subsequent addition to the list of Chloris and Meliboea, said to be the names of surviving daughters, or of one of them. Headlam in C.R. XIII 3 suggested that the number fourteen was chosen as suitable to the composition of a tragic chorus; but, so far as Sophocles was concerned, we know for certain that some at least of the daughters were acting parts.

447 77 yap 447

iya) TwvSe TOV TTpo<j)epTepov

Schol. B Horn. E 533 and schol.

E Horn. 6 186 rj...dvTL TOU yjv...Kal wapa .el if Trj Ni6j3rj'7J yap {JJV yap schol.

The same scholia attest the reading i? in 0. T. 1123, where L has TJV. L presents ri only in O.C. 973, 1366 : see Jebb on O.C. 768. Modern editors restore rj in

tragedy wherever metre permits, rjv is nowhere required in Aesch. or Soph., but occurs occasionally before a vowel in Euripides: see Rutherford, New Phrynichus, p. 243, and add Hel. 992. Cobet (N.L. p. 187), who was among the earliest to call attention to Porphyrius' note, observes that even the examples

IO2

I0*0KAE0Y5:

which he quotes are corrupted by the copyists. The fact that Porphyrius is obliged to quote instances in support of V shows, as Dindorf justly remarked, that the text of the dramatists had early suffered corruption in this respect. Trpo<j>epT€pou undoubtedly seems to bear the meaning elder; nor is there any valid reason for denying it to the word either here or in O.C. 1531 T<£ irpo^eprdr^ libvif rf/icuve, where Jebb is perhaps unnecessarily cautious. Few will, I think, be satisfied with Campbell's rendering, ' For I was dear to him who is mightier than they.' Is it possible to adjust the line to what we know of the plot? Welcker thinks that the speaker is one

of the daughters lamenting the death of her favourite brother. In that case it is certainly odd that we have irpofaprtpov rather than vpofepT&Tov; and of course the terminations are often confused. Hartung, who reads 7iy>o0epTdT(f>, seems to imagine that irpoipepTdTov is the reading of the MSS. One might guess that one of the daughters—perhaps Chloris, who according to one version was the only survivor—had been beloved by Apollo, the elder of Leto's two children. There is evidence of a previous friendship between Leto and Niobe in Sappho's (fr. 31) Adra KOX N(6/3a /id\a fih (fit\
448 3

7

^

^ \

e/xov crreiAai 448

post u lacunam ostendunt BE

prefer something like <3 <0(\e, /c\<W 4 4 8 Plut. amat. 17 p. 760 D T£V jxkv T&8'>• a/up' i/iov, .(TTeiXai..,, without deyap TOO 2o(poK\iovs Hio^iSdv paKkopivuv Kal 6VQ<XK6VTUP dvaKoKdral Tis oid&a ciding whether Si rbv <&apa6.-a suggestion in Nauck's first edition that \wv tare S^TrovBev it- ^s alrlas ire\eiTTiafior)0bvdWov oiSi ctiiiixaxov were part of the text of Sophocles, ayo)vi^6fJ.€yos. proceeds: -'c5<0iV>d^0' Dindorf, Hartung, Ellendt, and Campi/iov (rreiXai < xpot>. He compares Eur. bell ignore the lacuna after to; conBacch. 821. sequently, Ellendt gives the impossible rendering in me curando te occupa, and The allusion to the ipaa-r^s is confirmed Hartung the equally impossible ' umhiille by Athen. 601 A AZ rg more than a probability. This is all the NI6J3T; rbv T&V iralSwv. According to one more strange, since Wyttenbach (1797) version the beauty of Niobe's children had long since recorded the defect in the was an essential element in the story MSS. According to Bernardakis, there is (Parthen. 33 eis Zpiv a' Ifi' eff) see Plat. symp. 182 B, Xen. symp. 8. oreiXcu irtirkov. d/j0' 4/wl had previously 34. Cic. rep. 4. 4 Thebanos, apud quos been proposed by Papageorgius, but it is in amore ingenuorum libido etiam peruncritical to fill the gap with words which missam habet et solutam licentiam. require an alteration in the text. I should

NIOBH

103

449 4 4 9

Harpocr.

p .54, 2 5

p f f y

5ept/.7]o-T-f)s. H e says (8ff.):

Kal iv TOIS

Awtas

iv r
AldvflOS

[A€V aTToStdwfft

TOV &Kli3k't)KCt. oi)TO)

\^yeadai Tip 2o0OK\et ev N(6/3?;, £V f' TTJS TTLOLS avev TTJS oipas, /UKpa Trdflirav • Kai airopov/Aivris \4i-etas, 'ApiuTapxos Si T6 6\(as iv Trdfnv ths elireiv eV re TOIS frjpois 2o06/c\eiop e^Tiyotifievos TOP bv 'Aptareidov (FUG (Didym. p. 21), but am unable to follow

IV 326): this reference is elucidated by Reitzenstein, Das Miirchen v. Amor u. Psyche, p . 59 ff. Cf. Hesych. 1 p . 475 Sep^uo-Tijs" 6 (TKiiXi)! 7) 6 fftys (Palmerius for fj 6s cod. : Reitzenstein would prefer 6 ds) 0 TA dtpfuiTa eadiuv. 'ApiaTapxos 6
him when he suggests that Soph, was comparing a rolling wave to the movement of the b"epiJ.ri<jT-qs, and that the Hesychian gloss (II p. 29) eVkvo~ir5.o-daf Tb Trapair\r]
TOZS 6
\r]t;tv teVcu may belong here, as if the words were &s ei\vo~iraTO SepftfjaTov diKTjv.

We have no material which enables us to understand the nature of the difference between the interpretations of Aristarchus notice which Harpocration records is care- and Didymus, but it may be hazarded lessly truncated in Etym. M. p. 257, 36 that the controversy was merely whether the Sep/Mjtmjs—on whose identity they bepiLi)(TTT)s' Aufftas /iet' TOV \r]Ka ia) tnrb T£SV
104

IQcfrOKAEOYI 450

Ant. n 841. There seems to have been 4 5 O Athen. 176 F TOI>S yap iXtifiovs some doubt -whether i\v/ws was more aiXoiis, we nvrinoveiei 2o0o/c\^s (v Ni6j3)j re \av TlvfiTavitrrals (fr. 644), oi)K dXXovs properly the name of a part of the flute Tivas eTvai aKovofifv 1) TOI>S $pvytovs...Tu>v or of the flute itself: Hesych. 11 p. 71 8' iXifiav avXwv fivqixoveiiei Kal KaXMas iv jXv/iot' TA irpura TS>V ai\uv, &. Specially TOVS Qpvyuiv /nev chat eilprnj.a, OTO/idfeaSaicharacteristic of the Phrygian flute was its deep note: Athen. 185 A, quoting Si Kal cr/ei/raXefas, /car' ififpepeiav rod TT&XOVS (i.e. they are narrower than other papiiv avXov from Ion fr. 42, oifru \iywv flutes). xPVa&aJ- *' atfrols Kal Kvirplovs Ty conj. v. Jan) TWV av\Q>v avavevov Bereeynthiocornu\n Hor. Cctrm. 1. 18. 13. It seems highly probable that the spread (i.e. bent back from the straight) irpdffof the worship of the Great Mother eaTai, ai)Xei 8i rfj
451 K.pOK.0% 4 5 1 Schol. Soph. O.C. 684 K&V ijj 63 6 2o(poKXrjs riv KptiKov dvTiKpvs W /yp There is hardly any evidence elsewhere of a special connexion between the crocus and the cult of Demeter, though baskets of flowers of all kinds are often amongst her attributes. There is no special significance in the inclusion of the crocus in the list of flowers which Persephone was gathering when she was seized by

Pluto (Horn. h. Dem. 6). Schneidewin TT) pointed out that KpoKiarol, saffron-coloured robes, were worn by the women at the Thesmophoria, or festival of Demeter SetTfiocpdpos (Ar. Thesm. 138). But this fact is not conclusive, inasmuch as the colour appears also to be characteristic of self-dedication to the service of other deities: see the evidence collected by Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 444, and especially Ar. Lys. 645 with the scholia.

[ZOANHOPOI]

The title is only once quoted, and is of doubtful authenticity. Welcker (p. 66) first drew attention to the difficulties inherent in the supposition that the chorus consisted of gods fleeing vanquished before mortal warriors, or despairing at the capture of an earthly city. He inferred, accordingly, that the original statement from which the scholium was drawn did not relate to a play bearing the title Soavr](p6poi; but that Sophocles merely recorded, perhaps in the Laocoon (cf. fr. 373), the fact of the

N10BH—OAYSZEYZ AKANOOTTAHE

105

gods' appearance after the capture of Troy, each carrying his own image on his shoulders. Later criticism has done nothing to diminish the force of Welcker's objections. But it is not so easy to account for the corruption. If we assume that the adjective ^oavrj6poi was a part of Sophocles' description, and that the passage in which it occurred subsequently acquired some repute, the words e'ipijraL iv %oavr)6poi<; may have taken the place of € 7 T t TWV

£

f

6

452 [ol deol TO, eavTUiv $;6ava 4 5 2 Schol. Aesch. Theb. 291 etp-qrai Aen. 2. 351 excessereomnes, adytisarisque hi Koi iv SoavTio/cXeous iis 01 relictis, j di quibiis imperium hoc steterat. Oeot cc7ro r?)s 'IXi'ou £poveTo, and by Carm. 1. 1. 25, Plin. n.h. 28. 1. r8, and schol. rec. Xtyercu yap Sri ore £/xeXXe wopthe famous story of the siege of Jerusalem $T)6rivai i) Tpoia, etfrapijtrav oi 6eoi roit related by Tac. hist. 5. 13. For the tpwalv dveXofiei'oiiKTui'vaQiiTaay&Xiia.Ta Roman formula of evocatio directed to avrwv. It is referred to also by Eur. the gods of a hostile city see W. Warde Tro. 25 (Poseidon speaks) XeiTrw TO K\eiFowler, Religious Experience of the vov "IXtoK fiuifxois T' i/iovs, and by Verg. Roman People, p. 206.

O A Y I I E Y I AKANGOnAHE H NinTPA Only one of the following fragments is quoted as belonging to the title NLinpa, but the identification of the play so entitled with the 'OSvo-creu? d/cavOo-rrXr/l; is established by Cic. Tusc. disp. 2. 48 non nitnis in Niptris ilk sapientissimns Graeciae saucius lamentatur vel modice potins: 'Pedetemptim,' inquit, 'etsedato uisu, ne succussu arripiat maior dolor! Pacuvins hoc melius quani Sophocles: apud ilium etiim perquam flebiliter Ulixes lamentatur in volnere, from which it has been justly inferred that the Niptra of Pacuvius was an adaptation of the 'OSuo-creu? aKavOoirXrj^ of Sophocles1. The subject-matter is, as we shall see, sufficiently 1 There is just a possibility that Sophocles wrote a play entitled 'Siirrpa on the return of Odysseus, following the later books of the Odyssey, as well as the aKavdoxX^I, and that the Niptra of Pacuvius was a conflation of the two. This is mentioned for reasons which will presently appear.

106

IO*OKAEOYI

indicated by the title, arid further confirmation may be drawn from Arist. poet. 14. I453 b 33, where, in discussing the case of a man killing his kinsman in ignorance, he points out that this may occur e£a> TOV Spd/iaTos, as in the Oedipus of Sophocles, or ev avrfj TTJ Tpayq>8iq, olov 6 'AXicfiewv 6 'AcrrvBafiavTOS TrjXeyovos 6 iv rfj Tpavfiaria 'OSucrcret.

fj 6

The circumstances of the death of Odysseus by the hand of Telegonus, his son by Circe, were first reduced to a literary form in the epic Telegonia, the last of the Cyclic poems, generally attributed to Eugamon (or Eugammon) of Cyrene, and dated c. 568 B.C. The excerpt of Proclus, so far as it is relevant to the present purpose, mentions {EGF p. 57) the return of Odysseus from Thesprotia after the death of Callidice1, and continues as follows. Meanwhile Telegonus, the son of Circe2, who was voyaging in search of his father, landed in Ithaca, and plundered the island. Odysseus came out to attack him, and the son unwittingly slew his father. On discovering his mistake, Telegonus conveyed his father's body to Circe's island, and took with him Penelope and Telemachus. Circe made the three others immortal, whereupon Telegonus was mated with Penelope, and Telemachus with Circe. Apollodorus (epil. 7. 36) repeats most of this, with the addition that the spear with which Telegonus wounded Odysseus had a point made from the tckvrpov of a roach3. Eustathius {Od. p. 1676, 45), commenting on X 133, explains that the spear of Telegonus was designed by Hephaestus with a head of adamant, a golden shaft, and a point made as stated above, and that the roach had been killed by Phorcys because it devoured the fish in lake Phorcis. He also emphasizes the significance of a death which, coming from the sea, slew at last the sea-worn hero, and refers to the verses of Oppian (Halieut. 2. 497 ff.): Keivo TTOT alyavirj SoXixr/pei Kunrrfkaa-y Klpicr) Trfkeyovw TroXyfydpfjuucos wiracre prjTijp, al^fxafav Srjtois aXiov \xopov avrdp b vijcra) aiyifiorw irpoaeKekcre, Kal ov pade irwea irepOmv Trarpb<; iov, yepapS Se {3oi}8pofi.eovTi TOKrjt avTai, TOV /j,d(TTeue, ica,tcr\v ivefidtjaro icfjpa. evQa TOV aloX6fj,r/Tiv 'OBvaaea, /Mvpia TTOVTOV aXyea p,eTpijcravTa TroXvKfirfroMTiv ded rpvyav dXyivoeaaa p,ifj KaievrjpaTO

To the same effect the schol. on Horn. X 134, who adds that 1

Known to Sophocles as Euippe: see on Euryalus, I p. 146. Eustath. Od. p. 1796, 50 (£GFp. 58) says that Eugammon made him son of Calypso. See Gruppe, p. 7174. 3 rpvyhves r dinaBbKevrpoL Epich. fr. 66 K. 2

OAYZIEYI AKANOOnAHE

107

Hephaestus made the spear at the request of Circe. From Hygin. fab. 127 several fresh points emerge: (1) that Telegonus was driven to Ithaca by a storm, and was forced by hunger to ravage the fields; (2) that Telemachus accompanied Odysseus in his attack on the raiders ; (3) that the death of Odysseus was in accordance with an oracle, quod ei responsum fuerat ut a jilio caveret mortem ; (4) that the return to Aeaea and the subsequent marriages took place in consequence of the command of Athena. There are also remarkable differences in detail, which may be thought to indicate a dramatic origin, in the narrative of the inroOeaK to the Odyssey first published by Buttmann from a Palatine MS and reprinted in Dindorf's edition of the scholia (I p. 6, 13—23): Kal /Siaitra? -^povovs TTOWOV<; VTTO TOV Ihiov 7raiSo? 'YrfK.eyovov TOV diro TT/S Ktp/c?;? avTW yevofievov tcarakvei TOV fiiov. TOV yap d-rro TOV vlov ddvarov e« Tivcov fiavTev/xdrav eXirt^cov, TOV TrjXe/jia^ov €(j>v\drTeTO Kal avveivat, avTtp TraprjTeiTO. OT€ OVV 6 TrjXeyovos TTJV 'I6d/crjv K(tTe\a/3e Kal eavrov TQJ irarpl /caTefiijvve /AT) •rrpocr^e')^ofieva>v avTOV TCOV (fyvXdicav KavTevdev tcpavyri<s ? eVi VVKTOI ovar)<s, vofiicras 'OSvcrcreu? TOV TrfKefxa^ov elvat, dviaTaTai fj,eTa fu/>oii?. Kal avfJLTreacbv TijXeyova) TfKrjTTeTai UTT' avTov TC5 KevTpa T?J? Tpvyovos. Kal TOVTO) ra TpoTro) 'OSi/a"O"6L'9 dvaipeiTai,. fiadcov ovv TrjXeyovo? OTL TOV iraTepa dveiXe Trevdijcra'i avTov TnKpws ave%
'IdaKTjs. A somewhat similar account appears in Dictys 6. 15. It is evident from the allusions in later literature to the parricide of Telegonus1, and to the deadly weapon by which Odysseus was killed2, that the general outline of the story had become a familiar theme3. So far there is no particular difficulty in forming a conception of the manner in which Sophocles may have dramatized this material. Especially, we cannot fail to observe that the reiterated references to Dodona in frs. 455,456, 460 and 461 are satisfactorily explained by the statement in Hyginus and the Argument to the Odyssey that Odysseus, like Laius and others4, had been warned by an oracle to beware of his own son. Observe also that we have two forms of the story, according to which Odysseus either went out to attack robbers or resisted the attempt to make a forcible entry into his house. Some may think fr. 458 agrees better with the former version, though it is scarcely decisive5. 1 Hor. Carm. 3. 29. 8 Telegoni iuga parricidae. Ov. Trist. 1. 1. 114. Lucian, var. hist. 1. 35. 2 Schol. Ar. Plut. 303. Ov. Ibis 567. Philostr. vit. Ap. 6. 32, her. 3. 42. 3 For the curious variation of the legend concerning Odysseus' death which Aeschylus adopted in the "i'vxayuyol (fr. 275) see Gruppe, p. 7153. Add Sext. Emp. math. I 267. 4 For the parallels see Gruppe, p. 7155. 6 Ribbeck thinks that the words were spoken by Telegonus, when demanding an entry at the door.

108

IO4>OKAEOY5:

But, when we endeavour to determine how Sophocles linked the arrival of Telegonus to the earlier history of Odysseus, the enquiry becomes more complex. Frs. 453 and 454 show that the prophecy of Tiresias in the eleventh book of the Odyssey was included in the scheme of events preliminary to the action ; and it may be assumed that the dramatist accepted the circumstances in which Odysseus met his end as fulfilling the earlier prophecy1 as well as the oracle given at Dodona: davaTos Be TOI e'£ a\6<> avTM \ d/3\r}xpo<; fidXa TOW? i\ev
Odysseus, then, had returned from his last journey, undertaken, it would seem, in order to make the offering to Poseidon which Tiresias had enjoined, and in the course of his travels in Epirus had learnt at Dodona of a specific danger threatening his life, which appeared to be inconsistent with the earlier forecast. The alternative title requires us to assume that Odysseus was not recognized on his return, and that his identity was discovered by the old nurse in the same manner as in the Odyssey2. Also, it has been inferred from fr. 457, as well as from certain fragments of Pacuvius3, that, as in Homer, Odysseus related his adventures at considerable length. But how can Sophocles have imposed such a feeble duplicate upon an audience which knew perfectly well that all this had happened before? Wilamowitz4 escaped from the difficulty by supposing that the story adopted was a substitute for and not a sequel to the latter part of the Odyssey. The situation of Odysseus at the time of his return was the same as that described in the fictitious narratives of f 321 ff. and T 271 ff.6 Moreover, the whole of the struggle with the suitors was omitted6. He gets rid of this part of the history by taking a hint from /3 113 ff., where Antinous suggests to Telemachus that he should send his mother back to the house of her father Icarius, so that she may be betrothed from there. Penelope, then, had been sent to Sparta, and Wilamowitz finds an allusion to this event in Pacuv. fr. IV Spartam reportare instat: id si perpetrat. Ingenious as this is, we shall not readily believe that Sophocles would have put forward a version of the Return of Odysseus so fundamentally at variance with the whole scheme 1 Ameis-Hentze (Anh. to A 134) think that the whole story was built on a false interpretation of ej a\6s, which really meant 'away from the sea.' 2 Cf. Pacuv. frs. 1 n . Cic. Tiisc. 5. 46 called the nurse Anticlea, by a slip. According to Wilamowitz, Sophocles described her simply as rpo06s. 3 The probability becomes greater, if Brunck was right in ascribing frs. 861 and 965 to this play. Wilamowitz added fr. 748 : but see note in loc. 4 Horn. Untersuch. p. 194(1". 5 Note the reference to Dodona in if 327 = r 296. " Vurtheim (Mnem. xxix 54 f.), agreeing otherwise with Wilamowitz, suggested that the death of the suitors was announced in a messenger's speech.

OAYZZEYI AKANOOnAHE

109

of the Odyssey, while at the same time he followed that poem so closely in certain of its details1. Another attempt of a similar kind was made by Svoronos, who explained the title NtVrpa as referring to the bathing of the hero's foot, after he had been wounded by the poisonous barb2. But this ignores the evidence of the Pacuvian fragments, even if the title—already appropriated to the scene in the Odyssey—could3 have been applied to an entirely different situation. Ribbeck called attention to another important consideration. If Odysseus returned openly to Ithaca, why was he not recognized at once? However much protracted the period of absence, he had no longer—after the death of the suitors—the same motive for landing secretly. Ribbeck consequently inferred that he came back in disguise because of the danger against which he had been warned by the oracle at Dodona, that he was recognized by the nurse, and that he bound her over to secrecy. Pacuv. fr. I shows that the recognition took place on the stage. Ribbeck very fairly remarks that, though the fragments indicate that Pacuvius introduced a narrative of the adventures, fr. 457 is not enough to prove that Sophocles elaborated the theme, as if Odysseus were returning home for the first time. It might be urged against Ribbeck that for Odysseus to return to Ithaca in disguise rather than openly was the most likely method of incurring the very danger which he was anxious to avoid. But he is certainly right in suggesting that his first object after receiving the answer must have been to protect himself against Telemachus4. We must apparently assume that at this juncture Telemachus was ruling as his father's deputy, and continued friendly to him. At least, there is nothing to suggest the contrary; but the desire to shun the presence of Telemachus, and to get back to Ithaca5 so as to put in motion a scheme for his removal from the island , may have prompted Odysseus to show himself first to Eumaeus, in whose hut the recognition by Euryclea might then have taken place. If Odysseus desired to return without the knowledge of Telemachus, the dramatic advantage of the scene with the nurse is obvious. Or we might suppose, as an alternative, that Telemachus was temporarily absent from home. In either case, there is a strong reason for suspecting that Sophocles was the source of the version quoted above from the Argument to the 1

See also on Nausicaa, p. 92. Gaz. Arch, XIII 1888, p. 270ff. He sees in the sufferings of Odysseus a fulfilment of the curse in Phil. 1113. 3 Rom. Trag. p. 27c.fr. 4 Cf. the conduct of Oedipus in a similar predicament (O.T. 794). Another parallel is the case of Althaemenes, the son of Catreus (Apollod. 3. 13). 5 In Diet. 6. 14 Odysseus, warned by a dream, banishes Telemachus to Cephallenia. 2

no

IO4>OKAEOYZ

Odyssey, so far as it relates to the precautions taken against Telemachus, and the circumstances of Telegonus' arrival. Especially significant is the statement that Odysseus, hearing the noise, thought that it was caused by Telemachus, and leapt up sword in hand. We assume, then, that the action of the earlier part of the play was directed towards the attainment of security by Odysseus, when he believed that Telemachus was the source of the threatened danger. So soon as this seemed to be composed by the voluntary withdrawal of Telemachus, the inmates of the house were disturbed by the boisterous summons of Telegonus. The conclusion of the play must have comprised a messenger's description of the conflict, and a scene in which the mortally wounded Odysseus was brought on the stage1, the parentage of Telegonus was ascertained2, and a reconciliation with him was effected. To this part of the play, when the prediction of the oracle was apparently falsified, frs. 460 and 461 no doubt belonged, though Welcker3 was hardly right in supposing that the oracle at Dodona was mentioned for the first time at this point This essential matter must have been made known to the audience at an early stage, as has already been indicated. It is clear that the final scene resembled in many respects the conclusion of the Trachiniae; but whether Wilamowitz was right in pressing the parallel so far as to include in it the betrothal of Penelope to Telegonus at the bidding of Odysseus must remain an open question. Viirtheim thinks that Athena did not appear ex machina, but that the concluding scene is correctly represented in the Argument to the Odyssey. A play with the same title seems to have been written by the tragic poet Apollodorus of Tarsus, whose date is unknown (Suid. s.v.).

453 TO S5>pov 4 5 3 Schol. Vat. Dionys. Thr. p. 239, 16 Hilg. (Bekk. anecd. p. 872, 17, and Cramer, anecd. Oxon. IV p. 330, 3) r$ 1

OLfJLCJH <£cuSl//,CHS £)(Ci)P wodairds r& edviicd, 'P65ios, 6/>pf gOK\TJS oZv (om. ed. Bekk.) iv 'OSwaei &Kav0o-

This is proved by Cic. Tusc. 2. 48 ff. Diet. 6. 15 : Odysseus, feeling that his wound was fatal, thanked the gods that he had not fallen by his son's hand, and that Telemachus was free from blood-guilt. Then he enquired about his opponent's origin and name, and in so doing disclosed his own identity. Recognition, of course, followed. 3 See his discussion, pp. 240—248. 2

OAYZIEYZ AKANOOnAHE

in

irXtryi TTi TOV 7roios xp^d/ievos duvpoXoyd (d 7rd£aijUi fi.iya WTVOV. Rouse,op.cit.^.'jo, fioXoye'i ed. Bekk.) ' iroSairbv...iifJi.oi.t.' finds no direct evidence for this custom in classical times, but considers it in accordThese are the words addressed to ance with Greek ways of thought. In Odysseus by the stranger whom he was destined to meet, according to the prophecy A. P. 6. 4, among the offerings from the fisherman Diophantus to Poseidon, are of Tiresias, after he had reached the land KOX roi/s e£ aK&Twv 5i^^a5ioi/s ipiras.— of those to whom the sea was unknown : Dindorf is not justified in discrediting the Horn. X 12 7 O7r7r67"e Kev 5TJ rot o~vfi^Xr]fievos €iv va grammarian's interpretation of iroSairov &\\ di | (pr)JJ ddr/prjXoLyov %X ^ as = TToTov. Similarly Apollon. de synt. p j).—TO Supov has been sus1.3. 26 tiriidviKri'tivvoias Trodairos Xeyofiei', pected : Nauck pronounced the words ' vix sana,' M. Schmidt proposed Ttt-Xupov j ?cr$' Sre dvBVTTayerai /ecu TO 4I> TVOIOTT)TI, uniting the fragment with 454 (iroSairbv tire Xtyopev, 7ro6a7r6s eart Tpixpajv, fi4\as Tr4\o)pov a. tp. £. wfiots d$T]pb(BpojTovr/ \CVK6S. The testimony of Phrynichus is not so clear (p. 56 Lob., p. 128 Ruth.); ipyavov (pipus), Wecklein T65' oi/tois, rebut Rutherford was too hasty in denying ducing the text to a single line, and assuming that fr. 454 preceded it, Campbell the possibility of irodair6s = TTOIOS in Attic. TOO" Ipyov, and Mekler TO XQpov. But it There is at least a play upon the double sense in [Dem.] 25. 40 Ws out> OVTSS (GTI; is idle to alter the tradition. I suggest that Swpov is used in the sense of a votive K(IWV VTJ Ala rod drjfjiov. Todairds; olos oOs H-kv aiTiarai XVKOVS elvai. /XTJ fidweiv a 84 offering (usually avdOri/ia: but see the (j>T]<xi tpuXdrTetv TrpofHara aurbs KareadteLv. instances quoted by Rouse, Greek Votive We have also the analogy of TravroSairbs, Offerings, p. 323s, and in the index at for which see the examples collected by p. 418), and that the stranger suspected Headlam, On editing Aeschylus, p. 34 ff. Odysseus of an intention to dedicate to here than the god whose precinct he was approaching —dp.<|>i....bjp.ots is less accurate 61 the odd-looking tool which he was carrying in Homer'sd/i0' Ufioicrivix crdKos(A 527). The preposition is in fact used somewhat on his shoulder. In Homer, at any rate, the oar is to be dedicated to Poseidon by loosely ( = 0/z), as in Eur. Phoen. 1516 dfupl K\d5ovs e f o / i ^ a , ib. 1 5 7 8 &xei dt Odysseus, presumably because he has done with the sea and has no more need of it: T£KVWV ^Treo"' d/j.
454 adrjpofipcoTOV opyavov (j>epa>v 4 5 4 Schol. HV Horn. X 128 dflp Cf. Lucian Attach. 25 oirep yap 5T; 01 Xoiyov • T&V d8£pwv 6\odpevriKov opyavov. XtK[/.WVT€S TOV TTVpbv, TOUTO 7J/MV KCU TO. ddepes yap X^yerac Kvpiu)s rSiv darax^v yvjivdcia tpydfeTac £v TOIS aOK\^s'O5i«r
112

IO*OKAEOYZ

455 Ao>Sowi vaiayv Zevs 6 vaios /3poTa>v 4 5 5 6 vdtos Wilamowitz: oiii6s cod., biUanot Tennulius, 6 /xavreios Herwerden, 6/i.6yvi.os Meineke, 'O\t/nrios (vel 6 Koipavos) Blaydes 4 5 5 Steph. Byz. p. 248, 2, quoted on fr. 460, is the source of this fragment. For the heteroclite form AuSuvi see Jebb on Track. 171 l.— b vdios is an obscure title of Zeus which seldom occurs in literature. Dem. 21.53: oracles from Dodona order the Athenians to send deupol with three oxen and two sheep to each ox rip Ad TQ Notify. Inscriptions in considerable numbers are found in honour of Zeus NSos and Dione at Dodona (A. B. Cook in C. £. xx 370). The explanation of the title is disputed, but the prevalent view is that it is connected with vdw (vaiu) ' to flow ' (see on fr. 270), and was given to a local god, worshipped at a fountain which sprang from the foot of the sacred oak (O. Kern in PaulyWissowa v 1261). Schrader, however, holding that eaOs and yads are both descended from a word meaning ' tree,' interprets Zeis Ntiios as ' der im Baiimstamme gefasste.' The ancients also con-

nected the word either with (1) vavs, or (2) vabs; and the latter view has recentlybeen upheld by Th. Reinach (Rev. Arch. vi 97 ff.), who compares for the development of N&ios from Zevs Na6s that of Kepatimos from Z. Kepavv6s. If this explanation is correct, the title is comparable with Zeusftiii/x&son an inscription from Syria: see C. Q. in 231. It would seem, however, that Sophocles in this passage favours the derivation from valoi, perhaps as signifying ' the god who dwells (in the oak)': A. B. Cook in C. K. x v n 178 compares
456 ras 6ecnn<{)Sovs lepias 456

Steph. Byz. p. 248, 21 AwSdivq...

Trjs fiivTOi Aaddivri; AwSwvcuos.. .rb drjKvicbv Aiodcovls awo rod Aiodibvrj, ti>s HCLWTIVTJ ' i

' ras...Awdt The priestesses at Dodona have been the subject of much discussion ; but the material evidence, which is collected in Jebb's Trachiniae, p. 202 ff., need not be repeated here. The uncertainty of modern inferences may be estimated by the fact that, while Gruppe (p. 354), regarding the doves as possessing magical powers over the weather, makes the three old priestesses the original custodians of the rain-charms, Kern (in Pauly-Wissowa v 1262) thinks that the institution of priestesses was temporary and late, being due to the influence of Delphi. Thefollowingpoints should be observed. ([) There is no decisive evidence earlier than Pausan. 10. 12. 10 that the priestesses at Dodona

were called HeXeiades: see Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, 1 p. 39 n. (2) Strabo 329, with whom the schol. on Trach. 172 agrees, records two conjectural explanations of the Dodonaean doves: either (a) the flight of the doves was observed and interpreted by the priestesses, or (/>) there were no doves, but only women at Dodona; and the mistake was due to old women being called ireXtai in the Molossian dialect. (3) As Soph, mentions both doves (Track. 172) and priestesses as oracular, he must either be regarded as. a witness in favour of Strabo's first alternative, or as giving to the priestesses the name TJeXetdSes (Jebb in loc). In the latter case we should still have to explain why they were so called. It has recently been suggested with some plausibility that they represented a class of magicians who, by intimate association with the birds, had learnt to understand

OAYISEYI AKANOOTTAHE their language, and, as their interpreters, wore a kind of bird-dress when giving response to theirquestioners (W. R. Halliday, Greek Divination, p. 265 ff.). (4) Herod. 2. 55—$7 vouches the existence of three priestesses at Dodona, but tries to explain away the story about a speaking dove. Kern is thei'efore not justified in saying that Soph, is dependent upon Herodotus. Upsets is a shortened form of iepefas which is completely established by the

evidence collected in Meisterhans3, p. 40 : it occurs on inscriptions fourteen times from the fifth century onwards. It follows that iepLas, restored by Valckenaer and accepted by Dindorf, is wrong. The forms with e should be restored four times in Euripides, viz. Or. 261, / . T. 34, 1399, Bacch. 1114, in all of which the MSS give lepeiai etc. except that in Or. L and the schol. have leplai.

457 us ikatdecrcra 457

Hesych. II p. 57 eXaiaeaaa v-qSus that v-ti&is can be used in the metaphorical

(^\atd5e
L. Dindorf compared Nonn. 5. 226 tpbprov ' It is evident from the diverse exX planations in the first entry of Hesychius p pppJ that e\aideri%Xbs much-hesitation in preferring that which makes eAaide<7
458 ei [lev

TIS ovv < 4 5 8 Schol. Horn. A 135 in Cramer, anecd. Par. ill p. 5, 3 and p. 274, 31 2OOK\JJS ' el jiiv

...Xiye.' The line is quoted as an illustration of the idiom (7ra/>dXen/
• el Se fit], Xeye. and good); if not, speak.'

The text of

the Itiad runs: dXX' et ixkv SdxTouat. yepas... el 5e Ke /x-Jj SWOJGLV, eyui 5e Ktv avrbs

?Xw/icu. There are many examples in Attic: see Kuehner-Gerth 11 485, Goodwin, § 482, Shilleto on Thuc. 1. 82, Herwerden in Mnem. xix 338 ff. Cf. Antiph. 6. 23 et $j.ev auTip epuT&vTL rdX-qdri SoKoZev X4yew, et de fxr), e'rot/j.os T\ tKdibbvai. Ar. Thesm. 536 el per 08c m (artf el de fir/, 7}iAels...dTro*l/iX&
8

IOOKAEOYI

459 rr/v napovcriav TWV eyyvs ovratv 4 5 9 Phot. lex. p. 400, 6 and Suid. Ale. 606 diidpuv Qepatuiv eu^e»7)s irapovala. irapov
46O

vvv 8' ovre ^ CK AwSciifos oure TlvducSiv yv < aXaiv > TI? OLV 46O. 1 CK Meineke : els cod. Seguer. 2 -yudXwc Nauck: 71;...cod., •yvvri coni. Montfaucon, ixvx&v Conington, yvu>v A. Gennadius, yrjp&s TL$ &V TreLvetev £% efioi\la)v vel Trpo(pTJTi.i...iK Sb/iow (pins temptabat Meineke SatpviiSi] yiia\a /37}<7o/icu rdSe, id. 220, 4 6 0 Steph. Byz. p. 247 sq. AaSdvri ...Xtycrat Kai Awduv, TISTT]V yevuety ^otpo- Phoen. iyi irapa /ie(r6/j.<pa\a yiaka. $oi/3oi/ KX-^S 'OSvffffei anavdoirXriyi 'vSv...Teiffeiei',' the precincts of the temple are clearly Kai SOTIKTIV ' Aw5wci.../3poTui'' (fr. 455). described, and it has been inferred that The full gloss Au5
i is preserved in the name is applied to the temple as a whole owing to the unique character of a single MS: the quotations from Soph, the dSurov at Delphi, which was actually are not found in the epitome. a pit or cavern in the earth (Bayfield). 2 •yvdXiov is a certain correction, for ' Eur. Andr. 1092 f. 6s 5ia<7Tf£xe' SeoB | this word is specially applied to the sancXpvffov ye/iovTa 7i)aXa, S-rjaavpoiis ^porSni tuary at Delphi. Thus we find Horn. h. Ap. 396 xp^wv *K 5d0f7;s yvaXtov OTTO (at Delphi), where the words vabv ixiripHapvqiToio, as in Hes. Theog. 499, Aris-
461 /cat TOV iv Ao)S(ovL navcrov Saifjuov' evkoyov^ievov 461 461

dcufj-ov
Johann. Alex, de ace. p. 12, 3

hurt, but supposes that it has been inflicted by a stranger. See Introductory Note. Nauck needlessly suggested the y yi alteration of wavaov to iratn: for the Tr. : ' make the god at Dodona to lose position of the predicative participle in his praises.' The participle is supplementary: cf. Eur. Phoeti. 1171 TOUTO that case see Kuehner-Gerth I 624. icaioavTts vocrovv (n.). The words seem Blaydes conj. KKrjuov. The quotation is preserved by Ioannes to belong to an occasion when the prePhiloponus, the well-known commentator diction of the oracle has apparently been on Aristotle, who lived in the age of falsified ; that is to say, when Odysseus knows that he has received a mortal Justinian.—AuSuyi: fr. 455 (n.). udicvri Aw5aivi'

6 ( 1 . ws) ^JO<J>OK\T}S '05i>
OAYSIEYS AKANGOFTAHE—MAINOMENOZ

115

O A Y I I E Y I MAINOMENOI The story of Odysseus feigning madness in order to avoid the obligation of joining the Trojan expedition is not mentioned in Homer, but his reluctance to take part in it is implied in eo 115. In that passage the shade of Agamemnon recalls to Amphimedon, one of the suitors of Penelope, how he and Menelaus had stayed in his house, when visiting Ithaca for the purpose of persuading Odysseus to sail with them. The scholiast explains that Odysseus did not hold back through cowardice, but because his wisdom enabled him to gauge the serious nature of the struggle. The ultimate source of Sophocles' play is to be found in the Cypria, which Proclus abstracts as follows (EGF p. 18): ical iiaiveaOai 7rpocnroi7}crdfj,evov TOV 'OSvaaea eVi T&> /j,rj Oe\et,v crvarpaTeveaOai e^Mpaaav, Ha\a/j,^Sovi VTrodefievov TOV vlbv T^Xe/m^of iirl KoXaaiv1 et;apTrdo-uvT6<;. Apollodorus (epit.

3. 7), who may be following the same original, is somewhat more explicit, stating that Palamedes detected the fraud by seizing the child Telemachus from his mother's arms and threatening to slay him with a drawn sword. Further details are given by Hyginus {fab. 95). Odysseus had learnt from an oracle that, if he went to Troy, he would return destitute and without his companions after the lapse of twenty years. Accordingly, he pretended to Agamemnon and Menelaus that he was mad, assumed the sick man's head-gear2, and yoked a horse and an ox to the plough. Palamedes perceived the imposture, and, taking the child Telemachus from his cradle, put him beneath the plough with the words : ' Lay aside your sham and join the league.' Lucian {de dom. 30) describes a picture of the ploughingscene, which agreed with the version of Apollodorus in representing Palamedes as drawing his sword upon the child. Philostratus {her. 11. 2), who says that the story is mentioned by many poets, agrees with Hyginus as to the constitution of the team, but Lycophr. 815 ff., and Tzetzes in loc, substitute an ass for the horse. Eustathius (Od. p. 1696, 20) and Lucian {l.c.) merely state that different animals were yoked together. Various allusions to the subject show that its popularity was chiefly due to the tragic poets : see Lucian de salt. 46, Arist. poet. 8. 145 I a 26. Cicero, indeed, implies (off. 3. 97) that it was their 1 Welcker's kid n6\ov
ZOGOKAEQYZ

n6

invention, and quotes a speech of Ajax—apparently from the Armorum iudicium of Pacuvius or Accius (fab. inc. XXXI R.)— taunting Ulysses with breaking his oath1. Sophocles himself referred to the story in Phil. 1025 Kalroi crv fiev KkoTrf} re KavajKr)

£v
462 ITOMT

otada, yap

TTCLVT' e\e£a

'ApyoXicrj-t crvvTe/xvcov

a.)(y<;.

462. 2 uvvrtpjiav Dindorf: avvriixveiv cod. | /xiffovs yap ' ApyoKurri a i £{pvv vel [ivdos...ffwrtfiveiv tpCKei Herwerden, [i6dous...(FUPT£jj.i'(a /3pax& Wecklein (nvdov...flpa.xrt/ii>eifipax"Papageorgius is parenthetical after the model of ewe462 Schol. Pind. 1stkm. 6. 87 'Apyeloiv Tpbirov | elpfoeral irq. /c' 4v fp \6ITI eiireiv orffvvTOfxdjTarovdwell* (Alexis (7TOIS) avvTOfioi 5£ oi )j.6vov Aduoves, d\\a fr. 245, 4, II 386 K.), we get the absurd KO.1 'A/rye?ot. SO0OK\^S 'OSutrffet p.atvo- result: ' to speak briefly, my speech is fitvif • TT&VT'...ppax<Js.' brief.' For Argive brevity see on fr. 64. X I resembles SKVOUTTI fr. 473, 2 I have accepted Dindorf s awrift.vav : ' mj' speech is brief, making a short p fr. 827, Awpurri Ar. Eq. 989, cut in Argive fashion.' The confusion HekoTrovvaaiarl Theocr. 15. 92, fjappapiarl of the terminations of the infinitive and Ar. fr. 79, I 412 K. corresponding to the the participle is common (e.g. 0. T. 1170). vbs. 'ApyoMfa, fiapPaplfa, AupLfa, 2KVJ. writes : ' Can the text be defended ? Wfw; Blomfield's rule given by Jebb on Perhaps thus : fiv$os yap (Upaxis, for my 0. C. 1251 cannot be supported (e.g. story is a short one, (u•& vvv iv i\axl
Cf. Ov. Met. 13. 36 ff. The contrary is sometimes stated on the authority of Welcker, but see p. 132.

OAYIIEYI MAINOMENOI

117

463

463

SpeKToiai cod. (7^. Kp

463 vbfj.Of.sTpax&i

Hesych. 11 p. 323 BpenToit bivTai CLKQval I KpeyfJ.$. A. P. 9. 584 OLVTI TOU px Tpox&lois p (rpoxcuos cod. alb\ov iv Kiddpq. vbfxov ZnpeKOV (v 5e vulgo) 2otpoKkrjs 'Odixro-ei 'Odixro-ei ixai ,L£e
464

464

Hesych. II p. 79 eyUTrepyjs • 1/j.irei.- into account. The latter word seems to fj.a.tvo/ji€va). have no analogous formations in the -mo (-mmo-) class, and, if it has any claim to As 1/j.Tveipos is for f^-Trep-joindependence, e/j.Treipa/jos must be due to appears to postulate the stem p the influence of l/nreipos. For 4/j.iripaiJ.os : On the other hand, the Attic 7r^pcts correifxirepifs Lobeck (Path. Pro/, p. 156) comsponds to the Ionic ireipap and the pares ha/ibs : iT-qs. But the analogy Lesbian irippara (i.e. Trep-fara. etc.) : breaks down, since ITTJS does not belong Brugmann, Comp. Gr. 1 p. 146 E. tr. to the -e
So0o/cX?}s 'OdvacreT

465 465

rnj.a\d\pai cod.

465 Hesych. II p . 276 •qfiaXA.^/ai. • the gloss should be rewritten as Ke'tcpuipai, r\
I04>0KAE0YI 466

4 6 6 Hesych. II p. 324 . Cf. Etytn. M. p . 455, 45 6pia' Kvplas TU rrjs uvKrjs tj>ffKKa' KOX 9pid£eu>, TO v\\o\oyeiv • STJXO? 5£ Kal TO ev9ovaidfav. But Sptd^em ' to be in-

spired ' or ' possessed' is connected with a group of words which show clearly the same radical idea. Thus 9pla&is is defined by Suid. s.v. 0pia.fn.pos as rj TUV iroirjTwv fiavla. dpla/ifios, a hymn sung in procession in honour of Dionysus, belongs to the same root, but is influenced by the analogy of lan§os. Probably Sidiipa/xflos should be added, as formed from *8i-ffpia/x^os, whatever is the origin of the first syllable: see Sturtevant in Class. Phil. V 330. Here belong also the rare words Spitraeiv and dpiaadcu: see for the former Erotian p. 77, 5 9pl
fmlveaSai,

us Kal' ApuTTo<j>&vri% 6 ypafi/ia-

TIK6S (fr. 69 Nauck). ipLaauv hi aai rb Kara ^uxV i^lirreurffai., and for the latter, which is glossed by /lai/TetiarBai, Bekk. anecd. p. 265, 15, Etytn. M. p. 455, 42. But the most interesting member of the group is 8ptai, the name given to pebbles used in divination (ai fiavriKai ^ 0 o i ) : see Frazer on Pausan. 7. 25. 10. They were personified as the Thriae, and localized on Parnassus as the nurses of Apollo: for a full account of them see Allen and Sikes, Homeric Hymns, p. 312. Hesych. II p. 325 gives 6/>«6 as ioprrj'AtrbWuvos, and the same origin may be assumed for the Thriasian plain at Eleusis (this was where Athena threw down the Bpial, when she was told that they belonged to Apollo: Etym. M., Bekk. anecd.), and the Thriasian gate at Athens (Plut. Pericl. 30). For iv6pi.&fa see on fr. 544. Blaydes's proposal to substitute Bvpff&feiv (Ar. Lys. 1313) is misconceived.

467

467

467

Schleussner:

Phot. lex. p. 240, 10 fxayvov.

(sic) cod.

suggested by magnus.

Barker had cor-

2O(/>OKX?}S 'OSvaael" rbv jjAyav. T6V d7rorected the text of Photius to ixdyov...TOV f*,&
gloss is to some extent elucidated by a comparison with Hesych. in p. 62

lemma, thinks that the reference is to O. T. 387 and that 'OSvaaei is an error naytxbv' r 6 Ka8&po~tov. diro/jLdo'O'eii' yap for OlSliroSi. For dirbinayiw. see on fr. \iyovinv &TO.V irepiKaBaiptniTL Tois ivo%Kov- 34. Blaydes conj. fidKTijv. It is imfiivovs ni>i irdfci. T h e presence of possible to determine whether the fr. wrroiiAaaav in both passages can hardly belongs here or to the Ni7rr/)o. Dindorf be accidental, and, although fmyfibs is assigned it to the latter, but the subjectnot such a formation as we should expect matter rather suggests the '05ws for the nomen agentis, fiayvov is altogether ftaivb/xcvos. unintelligible. So also Hesych. i n p. 61 It is perhaps worth observing that fiaylSes " aU dirofidTTovo-t. Kai Kadalpovai. schol. N on Horn. Si 482 says roc 8e Ellendt was probably right in ejecting KaSalpovra Kal ayvlTt\v i\iyov, but ayvir-qv TOV jxiyav as a Byzantine interpolation, can hardly have become luuyvov.

OAYIIEYZ MAINOMENOI —OIKAHI

119

OIKAHI Pollux 10. 39 and schol. V Ar. Eq. 498 quote the lodes of Sophocles, but no such person as Iocles is known to the mythographers. Hence Welcker, following a suggestion of Brunck, and bringing frs. 313 and 1125 into the same connexion, inferred that Iocles was a mistake for Iphicles. But, whereas Brunck declared for the brother of Heracles, Welcker agreed with Boeckh (TV. Gr.princ. p. 129) that Iphiclus the son of Phylacus —occasionally known as Iphicles—was meant. The story of Iphiclus and the brothers Melampus and Bias is told in Horn. \ 286—297, and was well known in later times ; see e.g. Prop. 2. 3. 51 ff. But the constant recurrence of the form "I^t/eXo? is against Welcker's view, and the argument which he draws from the schol. on Apoll. Rh. 1. 54 is based on an error. Dindorf advocates an. alternative suggestion of Brunck that TOKXTJ? was an error for OiVXr??, and supports it by showing that the same corruption occurs in Eur. Suppl. 925, schol. Horn. X 326, and Diod. 4. 68. The mistake is curiously persistent, occurring at least five times in the MSS of Apollodorus (1. 68, III. 3, 60, 63, 87), and probably also in schol. Eur. Phoen. 133 Hepiftoias TT)? 'ITTTTOVOV

rov 'Io/cXeof? rov 'Ao-ra/cov KTS.

Assuming then that

the title Iocles is due to corruption, it is difficult to resist the inference that it should be replaced by Oecles. Welcker answers that nothing is known of Oecles making it likely that he would have given his name to a tragedy. That is true; but it is also possible that he was a character in the Alcmaeon (cf. Apollod. 3. 87), or perhaps even that he was represented as the companion of Heracles on his expedition against Laomedon (Apollod. 2. 134). Ahrens makes an alternative suggestion, that the subject of the play was the appeal of Alcmaeon to his grandfather for assistance and his rejection by him ; but, even if the text of Apollodorus warrants the inference drawn from it, the material is scarcely sufficient for more than an episode. 468 \t,voppa<j)rj 4 6 8 Pollux 10. 39 Kal ri\i) Si Trap' Eiw6\iSi 'ianv idfrvri iv rdii KAXaJii' (fr. 170, I 505 K.). dXXd Kal irapa 2ooicXei iv Tiji 'IOKX« \tyovTi [dXXd KCU] ' \Luoppa<pr) rvXela.' Fritzsche rejected the words dXXd Kal, which are more likely

to be an erroneous repetition than part of the text of Sophocles. id. 7. 191 2O0OKX?JS 5' 2
lO^OKAEOYZ

120

fwv. Xef. p. 39, 12, who quotes these passages, insists as strongly as the Atticists that KvtyaXXov was the correct Attic Ti)X?/e, el /cat e&poLS irov, ffv KvitpaXov X4ye. term, and adds the words o/juavi/xus T<£ irepiexoixivQ T V irepUx<""ravt *-e- t r i e Hesychius is more obscure (11 p. 497): nvi<paXov • riXr). -rjv be ^uets TiXrjV, &TTI- wrapping is called by the same name as KOI TVXUOV. But his meaning appears to is properly given to the stuffing. Thus we conclude that Kvi<paXXov originally be (so Lobeck, Phryn. p. 174) that, though Kv£aX\ov is the general term, meant flock (Plat. fr. 97, I 627 K. u (pipe I Kv£<paX\ov a,ua KO.1 irpo(TKe
proper Attic word was Kvi(paXXov. Moeris, p. 201, 20 Kvi(paXov dirt/cus, TiiXij eXX-qviKus. Phrynichus (CLI R.)

469 aXX' WL )(aCpa>v Kal Kara vovv TCW i/xov 4 6 9 Ar. Eq. 498 'dXX' I9i...ift6v': Xo.lp6v on which the schol. remarks, irap& TO yap GGJV p.e 8et ixa.vTevfi6.TWVf Ale. 811 XO<J>6KXCIOV it;'IOKXCOVS ( V : 4% 'Io\dov-al.). Xatpav

It is not clear from the schol.'s comment how much of the text is taken or parodied from Sophocles.—dXX' CBi \aipa>v occurs also in Nub. 510 and Pac. 729 at the opening of the KOHH&TIOV, where the actors are dismissed from the stage: so Vesp. 1009 dXX' Ire xalpovret

Swoi

fJoiXtcrff,

Ach. 1143 ire ST] xaf/xwres. But similar formulae of farewell or dismissal are found in tragedy: Track. 819 dXX' epwiru

Hipp.

f0'm t)iuv Seawor&v /xiXeL Kand, Ka 1440 xa^Pov(ra -l G"1' (JTeixe.

Shortly afterwards (Eq. 548) Aristophanes recurs to the same phrasing : iV 6 woiiyr^s &TIT] x^puv, I /caret vovv ?rpd£as, [ (patdpbs Xd/jLirovTi /Aenlnnp.—Kara vouv, = ex animi

sententia, is found also in O.C. 1768 d\X' et T&5 ^XeL Kurd, vovv Keiv^j.

/card

yvibfaiv is more common, but is not so used by Sophocles: see the comm. on O.T. 1087.

OINEYS The evidence for this title is meagre and inconclusive: see the notes on frs. 321, 732 and 26. The popularity of the subject —the misfortunes of Oeneus in his old age—affords perhaps some slight presumption that it was dramatized by Sophocles, as well as by Euripides {TGF p. 536), Chaeremon (id. p. 786), and Philocles (Suid). Cf. Timocles fr. 6, 16 (II 453 K.) yepcov TK aTv^ei, Karefiadep TOV Olvia.

Ov. Her. 9. 153 solio

OIKAHI—OINOMAOI

121

sedet A grins alto: \ Oenea desertum nuda senec.ta premit. The variations in the story of his restoration may be seen in Apollod. I - 77—79. a s compared with Hygin. fab. 175, but cannot be discussed here.

470 Zeus 17X10)7705 47O

Philodem. de fiet. p. 22 G. is quoted on fr. 26.

OINOMAOI Out of seven fragments ascribed to this play five are quoted from the Oenomaus, one from the Hippodamia, and one without any title. Most critics rightly treat the reference to the Hippodamia as an error on the part of Stobaeus or his authority, affording yet another instance of the substitution of the name of one of the principal characters for the usual title of the play (Introduction, §1). But this evidence is not such as to require us to follow Nauck in giving to the play the alternative titles OtVo/i.ao? r) 'lTnroBnfjLeta1; the cases of the Nansicaa and the Niptra are not analogous. On the other hand, it is improbable either that Sophocles handled the same material twice, or that the title Hippodamia related to the story of Chrysippus. Ribbeck's conjecture2 is equally unlikely. He concludes from frs. 471, 473, and 477 that the Oenomaus was a satyr-play, but that there was also a tragedy entitled Hippodamia, to which only frs. 472 and 474 belong. The story of Pelops and Oenomaus is most fully related in Apollod. epit. 2. 3—9. Oenomaus, king of Pisa, had a daughter Hippodamia, and either because he was himself enamoured of her, as some would have it, or owing to an oracle which foretold that her husband would kill him, prevented her betrothal by putting her suitors to death. For he made it a condition of assent to his daughter's marriage that the candidate for her hand must take her with him on his chariot, and endeavour to escape to the Isthmus of Corinth ; and that he himself should be at 1 That is to say, a double title does not appear to have been in vogue in the learned world. It has been shown that double titles were not due to the author (Introd. § 1). 2 Rom. Trag. p. 442. Kramer, de Pel. fab. pp. 17—23, also held that the Oenomaus was a satyr-play, but I do not know for what reasons. The reference to the KopSaii in Pausan. 6. 22. 1 does not help Ribbeck's case. So also Weizsacker in Roscher in 773, who relies on fr. 473.

122

IOOKAEOYZ

liberty to kill the suitor, if he overtook him. Having armour and a chariot given to him by Ares, Oenomaus was successful in destroying many aspirants1, and nailed the skulls of his victims in a row against the wall of his palace—a warning to future candidates. At length Pelops appeared, whose beauty so fired the passion of Hippodamia that she implored Myrtilus, the son of Hermes and charioteer of Oenomaus, who was himself in love with her and ready to do her a favour, to assist her lover against her father. Myrtilus, accordingly, caused the chariot of Oenomaus to be overturned by omitting to insert the pins in the naves of the wheels; and the king, unable to extricate himself from the reins, was mortally injured, or (according to others) slain by Pelops. Recognizing that he had been cheated, Oenomaus with his dying breath invoked a curse upon Myrtilus. Pelops proceeded on his journey with Hippodamia and Myrtilus. But on a certain occasion, when Pelops had left his car in order to fetch a draught of water for Hippodamia, Myrtilus attempted to violate her. Hearing of this from his wife, Pelops, being then in the neighbourhood of the promontory of Geraestus, threw Myrtilus into the sea which was subsequently called Myrtoan. Then Myrtilus, in his turn, cursed the race of Pelops as he fell. Pelops travelled as far as the Ocean-stream, and, having been purified by Hephaestus, returned to Pisa, and succeeded to the sovereignty of Oenomaus. Before the commencement of this narrative Apollodorus {epit. 2. 3) relates that Poseidon gave to his favourite Pelops a winged car, which could pass over the sea without wetting its axle. This statement corresponds with the account of Pindar {01. 1. 70 ff.), in which the victory of Pelops appears to be the immediate consequence of the gift of the car (v. 86): TOV fiev dyaWtov 8eo<; \ eScofcev &ipov TS ^pvaeov irrepoi- j crtV T' a/cd/jiavTCR t7T7rov?. I e\ev 8' Olvofidov ftiav \ irapdevov re avvevvov. Thus

there would seem to have been an early version of the story in which Pelops succeeded by grace of Poseidon and the virtue of his magic car, so that the connivance of Myrtilus was not required2. It should be added that nothing is known as to the appearance of the story in the epics, except that the suitors of Hippodamia were catalogued in the Hesiodic Eoeaes. Still, it is certain that Myrtilus was at an early date a prominent figure in the legend ; for, apart from the evidence which connects him with Elis, the narrative of Apollodorus coincides in several 1 Pind. 01. 1. 79 mentions the number as thirteen. Others gave twelve : Apollod. epit. 1. 5. The lists in the scholia to Pindar and in Pausan. 6. 21 10 came from the Hesiodic Eoeae (EGFp. 141). 2 3 Cf. Dio Chrys. 64. 14. See note supra.

OINOMAOZ

123

respects with the account attributed to Pherecydes {FHG I 94) by the scholiasts on Soph. El. 504 and Apoll. Rhod. 1. 752. The incidental allusions to Myrtilus in Soph. El. 504 and Eur. Or. 990 treat him as the original cause of the misfortunes of the Pelopidae; and this is sufficient to show that he must have played an important part in the tragedies which dealt specifically with the fate of Oenomaus. Euripides also wrote an Oenomaus, which was probably produced with the Phoenissae in 409'. It was thus later than the present play, which was certainly earlier than 414 2 ; but the fragments of Euripides give no indication of the character of his plot. Further, since we cannot tell whether Accius imitated Sophocles or Euripides in his Oenomaus, no inference can be drawn from the Latin fragments. It becomes pertinent to enquire how Sophocles contrived the intervention of Myrtilus. In the account given by Hyginus {fab. 84) the love-motive is entirely absent. There Pelops is frightened by the failures of his predecessors, and bribes Myrtilus by promising him half of the kingdom as a reward for his assistance. Subsequently, when returning homewards, he began to fear the disgrace of acknowledging the plot, and, wishing to avoid the consequences of keeping his word to Myrtilus, threw him into the sea. Other variations are extant. Thus in Pausan. 6. 20. 17 it is said that Myrtilus acted so as to cause the horses of Oenomaus to shy. This is simply an inference from the epithet Tapdgnnros, a title applied to Myrtilus, when worshipped as a hero in Elis. In Pausan. 8. 14. 11 Myrtilus is a lover of Hippodamia who was bribed by the promise that he should enjoy her company for one night. But, when subsequently he reminded Pelops of his oath, he was thrown overboard. The reference to an oath induced Ribbeck3 to make use of the story for the elucidation of fr. 472. The grossness of the details makes us loth to assign it to Sophocles, although the allusion in itself agrees well enough with the requirements of the supposed situation. It should be observed, however, that in the account of Apollodorus no bribe is mentioned ; and the oath may have been exacted from Myrtilus by Hippodamia as a guarantee that he would perform his undertaking. In any attempt to discover the main outlines of the plot of Sophocles, the importance of fr. 474 must not be overlooked. This agrees so remarkably well with the words of Apollodorus4, that we may safely reject the 1 2 3

See Introduction to my edition, p. xxxiii. Fr. 476 is a quotation by Aristophanes in the Aves.

P- 4 . 3 4 Epit. 2. 6 ov (sc. H4\OTTOS) TO KaWos ISovffa r\ 'IirTroS&tieta ^pojr The same point comes out clearly in schol. Eur. Or. 990. 4

i2 4

I00KAE0Y2

version of Hyginus, and infer that Hippodamia took the chief part in persuading Myrtilus to assist Pelops. Pisa was undoubtedly the scene of the action, as was also the case in the play of Accius (frs. iv and X). Frs. 471 and 473 suggest that soon after his arrival, which is perhaps referred to in fr. 475, Pelops was reminded of the gruesome fate which had overtaken former suitors. Fr. 476 is part of a chorus sung during the progress of the contest, from which we may perhaps infer that, as in Apollodorus, the course extended from Elis to Corinth. It is impossible to say whether the sequel was announced by a messenger, or whether Pelops and Hippodamia returned in person. It will be observed that Geraestus is mentioned not only by Apollodorus and in other late texts1, but also by Euripides2, as the scene of Myrtilus' death. Our authorities have not been careful to explain what Pelops was doing in Euboea, or how he got there. But, if we recognize that his possession of the magic chariot, which moved as easily over sea as over land, is implied in the whole of Apollodorus' narrative, the solution of the difficulty is brought a step nearer. Myrtilus was thrown into the sea, as they were passing along the coast of Euboea in the course of a journey across the Aegean. And when Apollodorus adds that Pelops was purified by Hephaestus before he returned to Pisa, we may conjecture that Lemnos was the goal towards which they were travelling. There is clearly a reminiscence of the voyage across the sea in Pausan. 8. 14. 11, when Myrtilus is said to have been thrown overboard; but some rationalist has substituted the ship for the car. The introduction 1

Tzetz. Lycophr. 156, schol. Eur. Or. 990.

2

Eur. Or. 988 iroravbv fih diay/xa TTISIXUV \ TedpnrTrof3a.fioi>i.
understood, should be thus explained : ' Ever since P. in his four-horsed car guided across the waves the swift course of his winged steeds,' etc. Even Weil, right in other respects, misconceives the object of the journey. The winged car was originally, as we have seen, sufficient in itself to save Pelops: Ares was no match for Poseidon on the sea. But the introduction of Myrtilus obscured the reason for the traditional belief that Pelops had crossed the sea in his chariot. Hence other reasons for a sea-journey were invented and clumsily added to the revised legend. Still later, the existence of the magical powers was forgotten or discredited (see e.g. Paiaeph. 30). To the evidence already quoted concerning the chariot add Philostr. imag. 1. 16. 1 TO 5' apjxa. lira rjj yrj TT\V BaXarrav Siaareixei., Kal ovSi pavls OLTT' avrrjs Tr-qSq. is rbv ofova, /3e/3eu'a Si Kal TTJ yrj toiKvla. virtnteLrai. TOU 'IVTTWS, ib. 1. 29. 1. Cic. Tusc. 1. 67 equi Pelopis illi Neptunii qui per undas currus suspensos raptiisse dictmtur. Schol. Horn. B 104 says distinctly &Lafia.ivbvTusv yap avrdv Sia. TOV Aiyalov. Various combinations, which cannot here be discussed, are made by Wilamowitz in Herat, XVIII 7172; Robert, Bi/du.Zzed,p. 187.35; Tilmpel in Roscher 11 3315; Weizsacker, ib. in 771. The latter refers to an aryballos from Capua, where Pelops and Hippodamia are represented travelling over the sea in a four-horsed car, while Myrtilus falls backwards from it into the water.

OINOMAOI

125

of Hephaestus as a god capable of purifying from blood-guilt will occasion some surprise, and is possibly to be explained by his occasional appearance as a sun-god1. At any rate the mention of the Ocean-stream is appropriate in this connexion, as may be seen from Horn. £ 402. The Oenomaus was one of the most successful plays of Sophocles, as may be gathered from the fact that it was still acted at the rural Dionysia in the middle of the fourth century, when Aeschines the orator appeared in the title-role. Hence Dem. 18. 180 bi> ev KoXXu™ TTOT Qlvofxaov «««&)? eirerpi-^ra'i, ib.

242 avTOTpayiKO'i TriOrjicos, dpovpaZos OtVo/iao?.

From Hesych. I

p. 287 we learn that the play was the Oenomaus of Sophocles : apovpaios Olvofiaos' Ar]/J,oa8ev7)$ Xla-^LViqv OVT<»? e<£?7, tirei Tt)v ^copav irepivoaTttiv vTre/cpweTo 2o<£o/eA,eoL"> TVV Olvofiaov.

Kara In

the anonymous Life of Aeschines (fiioyp. p. 269, 26) we are told on the authority of Demochares the nephew of Demosthenes, whose credibility is said to be open to doubt, that, when taking the part of Oenomaus pursuing Pelops, he fell down in a ridiculous manner, and was lifted to his feet by Sannio the choir-2 master. From this it has been reasonably inferred by Ribbeck that the start of the race was actually represented in the orchestra. 471 rj fJiev &>? t dacrcrova, rj 8' « s t T4TOK€ TralSa 471. 1 ei fi-fv cod. Apollon. | ihffei codd. Si 6><Tir€i;ov cod. Town]. : corr. Cobet 471 Apollonius de pronom. p. 70 B (ed. Schneider, p. j ; , 20), discussing the form i', says: d|ioxioK\ijs fidprvs xPW7t*lJiel">s *" Oivo/xaif ' « fiev ottrei daGGOva etotixr etreKoi 7rai5a.' Schol. Townl. Horn. X 410 nves rd uitrd <5ia TOO I ypdrpovai ml $airov avri TOO O>S air-/). d/W ov xPVTai ".vT-y 6 TOITJTTJS. 2 O 0 O K \ ^ S OlifOpLiiui ' 7) u.£v uioel daffffova 7} Si Jxrirefou traiSa.' ianv ovv SltpOoyyov (i.e. ii
2

eiSuxra Te/cot cod. Apollon., r)

contest by reminding him of the fate of all his predecessors. Even the mothers of the competitors deceived themselves with vain hopes—each vaunting the speed of her own son.' 1 X was a rare form of the nominative belonging to the pronoun of the third person, and corresponding to ^701 and av. Dionys. Thrac. ap. Bekk. anted. II 640 irpitcdiwo. Trpwrorvirajv ixkv eyw—av— t It is here equivalent to avri), ' that she (herself).' There is very little evidence for its existence beyond what is quoted above: Etyin. M. p. 615, 6, explaining why certain pronouns (avrSs, OVTOS, and so forth) are called novoTpbaaTroi, eTreiSr/

Malten, however, regards this as a very late

IO*OKAEOYI

126

it would represent TIKTW, a registering O6K ^xovfXt. irpGyrop KO.1 deOrepov irpbtrwirov Kara TT\V atcoXovdlav' rb yap eytb, ffi, oiiK present, as in Eur. Bacch. 2, Ion I.s6o. eiffl Totiroiv dXXi TOV t. Priscian 13. 2. See nn. on Eur. Hel. 568, Hclid. 208, and Gildersleeve, § 201. G. Dronke in 8 apud Graecos nominativus supradicti Rh. Mus. IX 115 conjectured^ 8 us t pronominis, id est A, rarus est in usu : ircuS' (TIKTCV. H. proposed but did cf. Etym. Gvd. p. 278, 7. Bekker not explain T&foi. [Hartung, p. 123, wished to restore it in Plat, synip. 175 c, also prints Tt^oi, but thought that the 223 n, and Stallbaum suggested that it words were a conflation of two separate might be concealed in rep. 617 E, but fragments r) /lev ais fuv (sic) Bkaaova. they have not convinced subsequent and y) d' ws /iu> Irene waiSa.] Wackereditors. On the other hand, Hermann's nagel (Studien zum gr. Per/., Gotoi)5' aTiByoi iv in Pind. Pyth. 4. 36 tingen, 1904) objects to Cobet's coris accepted by Schroeder. rection on the ground that in older Greek Dindorf, keeping T&ot, held that the lines were trochaic y n£v ws I' ddcrcov', 17 5' T^roKa is not used as a perfect of result, wstrficoi I naiSa, and Bergk, in order to get but means either (1) ' t o have been delivered o f a child, as in Hdt. 1. 112 ; or a senarius, conjectured that we should read (2) ' to be a mother,' as in Hes. Op. 591. iralS' i) in.ev...TiKoi.. Both assume that V is long, whereas Apollo nius p. 71 A T^TOKE is by no means a certain correction, but Wackernagel's rule is probably too asserts that it is short: cf. Etym. M. p. 588, 10 TQVTO yap rb 'I, ws rpWov /3pct- stringent. Xvv6[L£V0v irpbaonrov, etfyeXKiaaro TO V. [The reference to Draco, p. 106, which It is better, therefore, to accept Cobet's is sometimes quoted in this connexion is riroKe (Coll. Crit. p. 191), although valueless, for it has been established by something might be said for TIKTOI. Lehrs and others that the writings passing But Blaydes, who has made the same by this name are a forgery of the sixproposal, should not have explained it teenth century.] as the oblique form of ITIKTOV. Rather

472 opKov Se TrpocTTe9evTos OLtrcra yap 6eov<; afiapTaveuv. 472.

1 irpooTeBivTos Gesner: irporedivTos codd.

4 7 2 Stob. Jlor. 27. 6 (in p. 612, I Hense) 2O0OK\^OUS ' l7T7ro5a/Aetas. ' opKov...afj.apT&veiv.' 1 irpooTeSevTos: the oath is an additional sanction to the bare word. Cf. Dem. 22. 22 Srav ris \j/i\$ xpyf&pws X67(fi ixij irapi.ax'Fa.i iricmv we \4yei. So El. 47 #77e\\e 5' SpKov (Reiske for opKif) TTpoanfleis. See also Jebb on Phil. 942 vpoirdek re xei/ra Se^tdv. Track. 255 .opKov avry irpoafHaXtJiv. 2 ^"XT n e r e >s animus in the wide sense, moral and intellectual rather than physical. For the separation of from the man himself cf. Ant. 175 d vov 5e TravTos dvSpos eKuaOeiv | ^ x ^ /ecu (ppbvqiM Kai yvdjfj,riv (Jebb), it. 227. —<j>uXdo"
3 The stress is laid upon h deoiis aiiapraveiv, since pi\i). Philem. fr. 163, II 525 K., airQ 5' iyleiav Tpdrov, elr' einrpa^iav, j Tpirov 5^ ^a£pet^, eir' o
OINOMAOZ The lines are supposed to be spoken by Hippodamia to Myrtilus: see Introductory Note. With respect to the sanetion imposed by an oath contrast the famous speech of Brutus in Shaksp. Jul. Caes. ii. 1. 114 ff., where I would urge

127

that ' the face of men' is exactly parallel to <j>l\uv fi4/x\//w in v. 3, and means (as Verity has already suggested) the resentment of others at the discovery of a treacherous breach of obligation.

473 473

Athen. 410 B, c xelP^^aKTPov Si

KaKeiTdt 1} rds x«P"S aireflaTTOVTo w/uoXii'C(J jievos.' H e s y c h . i v p . ,^2 'ZKUBUJTI Krpov' ol liKvSai rGiv \a(x^avop.€vwv irokejiiw (so Porson for irokwv wv) TCIS KetpaXas inBepovTes Titrav(iK&. TOU Sip/xaaiv Lennep) avTl xeiP°^KrPoltf exp^vro. Pind. fsth.

3. 92 (4. 54) speaks of Heracles coming to Libya in order to stop Antaeus from roofing his temple of Poseidon with the skulls of visitors: the schol. says that in legend this was the practice of the Thracian Diomedes, and that Pindar is peculiar in attaching it to Antaeus; but that Bacchylides (p. 407 J.) represented Euenus as dealing thus with the unsuccessful suitors for his daughter, and Sophocles Oenomaus: idtois rbv ' Avraibv (p7](Ti TU>V %€VU3V Tu>V TJTTlOfJ.e'pWV

TOIS

Kpa-

viois ip4(p€if TOV TOV HotTet.5Qt>os vabv' TOVTO yap laropoOcn TOP Bpfna Aio/ir/Sriv irotflv, Bat<xv^i.dys 5^ EOrjvou eirl rCiv ^Hapwrfffffrjs nvqGTTjpojVj ot 5e Oiv6fJ.a.ov,

uis 2,orp>K\ijs. Similarly schol. BD Horn. I 557 and Tzetz. Lycophr. 159 mention Oenomaus, Antaeus, Euenus, Phorbas, Diomedes, and Cycnus together as having used the skulls of their conquered victims to build a temple. For Oenomaus see also Hygin. fab. 84 vmltis interfeclis novissime Pelops Tantali filius cum venissd et capita humana super valvas fixa vidisset eorum qui Hippodamiam in uxorem pelierant', Ov. Ibis 365 ut iuvenes pereas, quorum vestigia vultus J brachia Pisaeae sustinuere fores. Ov. Fast. 1. 557 (of Cacus). Philostr. imag. 1. 29. 1.

cles appears to be the only authority who asserts that Oenomaus scalped his daughter's suitors : ' shorn for a napkin in the Scythian fashion ' ; and we shall probably not be wrong in adding this to the list of cases where he has introduced into his plays an episode or an allusion borrowed from his reading of Herodotus (see on fr. 29). Herod. 4. 64 describes how the Scythian warrior brings home the heads of all whom he has slain in battle, and how he scalps them and treats the skin: bpyaaas Sk avrb are Xetpb[iaKTpov ^KTrjraL. e/c de TCIV ^ a \ t vGiv TOV '(TTTTOV, rbv airrbs eXaiivei, e'K TOVTOV i^dwrei nal dydWerai' 6s yap av irAetcrTa d^p/j.ara xeLpbfJ'aKTPa *=XV* dvj]p apiGTos OVTOS KeKpLTac.

Herwerden, relying on Hesych. I.e., proposed eKbehap^ievos for €KK€Kap|i€vos, and his conjecture has been accepted by Nauck and Blaydes. But this is to reduce to prose the subtle word-play of the text, which with a grim irony suggests that the victim has been shorn ; for the form of expression certainly recalls Ar. Tkesm. 838 (TKd
—the ' Scythian towel' tonsure in place of the 'Bowl.' So Ach. 849 Kparivos ev KeKapfievos iJ.01.xbv. F o r the ace. after

the pass. part, corresponding to the object of the active verb see Jebb on Track. 157. Here the construction implies that a second accusative (of result) might have been attached to ndpta when used in the active with a personal object, much in the same way as /carar^uyw etc. are followed by a double ace. (Kuehnero UiV6/xaos KTeiftof rous r^s ' l7T7ro5a/xetas p.vT]iTT7Jpas (ppovei rots TOVTUV &Kpo0Lvioi.s, Gerth I 323, Starkie on Ar. Ach. 302). Ribbeck

For the adv. 2KU6UTTI see on fr. 462 and

thinks the same matter is referred to in Accius Oenom. fr. v horrida honestitudo £.uropaeprincipumprimo ex loco. Sopho-

cf. Parmeno ap. Athen. 221 A dvr\p yap

av&Tnwv

ras

avruv

K€<pa\as.

C'XKUJP

olvov

OJS

vdwp

tiriros

|

^

d

l

IO*OKAEOYI 474 UeXoxfj Ivyya drjpaTrjpCav e/3wro9, aa-TpaTnjv TW ofjufiaTcov y dakireTai jxe.v avros, i^oTrra 8' i/xe, Icrov fjierpoiv 6(j>0a\jji6v, wcrre. TCKTOVOS napa crTadfJLrjv IOVTOS opdovrai Kavwv.

TOIOLV

5

4 7 4 . 1 rolav Hi\oip ivyya Valckenaer (Ivyya Pal. ex Musuti coniectura inter3 g ddXTerai Papapolation putat Kaibel): TOidvb" iv 6\pei \iiyya A (\iiyxa E) georgius : 7J6' d'XXeraiA, ivfldXirerai Ruhnken, itcddXirerai Boissonade | 5' e/ii Brunck : 0VT0S vel TL$£VTOS Herwerden,'MTOVVTOSValcke6i /ie A 5 irplovTos Wecklein, tax naer, ISbvTos Tyrwhitt 474 Athen. 564 B SO^OKXTJS 8{ vov Ag. 1193 ijtiapToii, rj 8-qpta TI T o j i r i j ! Trepi TOV tcdWovs rod HeXoiros 5ia\eyoTIS u5r; But, apart from the obscurity of p.ivqv irofqaas TTSJV ' IirTrodd/Mciav (fnjffl X17? and the extreme awkwardness of 1 ' roidvd'...Kavwv. retaining 4v 6<(iet. together with 6np.6.Twpy 1 f. See cr. n. For \1ry7a Erfurdt the objection raised to ft/77a ignores the range of its metaphorical usage, substituted Xiyya, and Schneider appears which the passages quoted from Pindar to have been the first to suggest that the Hesychian gloss (ill p. 52) Xi>7?" TO T6£OI/ and Aristophanes (amongst others) attest. was an error for \ly% (Lobeck, Paralip. And the special aptness of tvy£ to the gaze of the lover is proved by Heliod. p. n o ) . In Horn. A 125 Xfyje j3i6s 8. 5 ixeyaXrjv eh ireiffw KtKTtfrai. irpbs (Xifu or \lyya) is a7ra? Xtybjixvov for ' the bow twanged.' J. writes : ' As to av8pas tvyya ra yvvaiKeia KOX VUVOIKO. $\£mm.Ta., and by Lycophr. 310 Trvp ivyya., the ivy%, or wryneck, called in fiaXiov Ivyyc TO^WV—the charm of Troilus Greek from its cry (lifra), is constantly mentioned as a love-charm. It was for Achilles—where firy-yt is fantastically joined to rd^av. I have, therefore, no bound on a wheel, and the revolution of the wheel was supposed to draw men's hesitation in accepting (with Nauck) Valckenaer's brilliant emendation. — hearts with it. Pind. Nem. 4. 35 Ivyyi 5' eXKo/iat ijTop, " b y a charm." So aorpainiv expresses a familiar metaphor : Achill. Tat. 0. 6 IStnv 8' b O4p7ro7Xai)o"o"e(TKe /cat t/xepov dffTpdtpesuggests, the idea of an arrow, a glance UKiv. The application is different in darted from the eye, would be more Ar. Ach. 566 daTpairas ^\£TTUV. appropriate than that of the firyf : cp. Aesch. Ag. 742 ixaKBaKov d/Lp&nw /3Aos, 3 The metaphorical use of Kaleadat, Sri^i8v/iov gpwros 8.V0OS, Suppl. 1004 op.iia.roi Oepnaiveo-Bat., tiro, ardco and the like is $t\KT^ipiov I rA|eu/i' ^irepjij/ev, ipipov VIKW- too common to require illustration. For /ievos.' I have discussed and illustrated the 0d\Tre
OINOMAOI 4 f. Translate : ' Scanning with responsive vision as closely as the craftsman's straight-drawn plumb-line clings to its level,' i.e. letting his glance go straight to meet mine, no less directly than the Kavihv draws its line. The fiery flash is a physical emanation from the eye, which, making its way straight to the eye of the beloved, is met in its course by the responsive glance of mutual love speeding as fast to the eye of the lover.

p

129

/xerpTjcrw Kavbvi Trpoffndeh.

The

simile would fit, if the meaning were that the carpenter is drawing or testing with his Kavii>v a line parallel to the line traced by the araBjj.t). Hippodamia's glance is the aTad/it]: that of Pelops is the Kaviliv, which keeps its due distance all along.' But aradp/t) and Kavwv are not always so distinguished, and they are actually identified by the schol. on

Ho m er ' s eirl ffradixriv tdvvev. See also Cf. Heliod. 3. 7 7/ TWV tpwruiv ytveois, Eustath. Od. p. 1531, 62 and other oh TO, opwfieva TT)» apxv" SISuvi Kal otov passages quoted on fr. 330. Here, at V7rriv€fia did TUIV drpQaXfiujv TO. trddij rats least, I think there is little doubt that ipvxais eitTTO^evovTat rCbv yap £v ijfjuv Kavihv is the ruddled string (or rule), as in irbpuv re Kal aiff81i6a\/j.bs yap 656s £puTtK<£ Tpaifxan.

Plut. qu. conv. 5. 7. 2 p. 681 B ai yap

iirel Kal TOI)S T^Krovas TTOW&KIS eoipaK^vat

fioi 80K& Baripii> TWV b9aX)i.0iv aixeivov 6fi.iJ.aTwv iKirliTTOv, etr' dpa aTad[n)v (iiou has been well avrtflXtyeis

TUIV £v wpa

Kal TO 5ta T&V

explained by Bayfield. It follows that there is no antithesis here between trraduri and Kaviiv as separate implements for measuring. Purser in Did. Ant. 1 354 a takes a different view: ' The carpenter used to correct errors in the Kaviiv by the fr. 39 ai(7Te 5nr\6oi \ \IJKOL vefipbv
475 Sia rffiJKTpas cr 6pa> Kadalpovd' iirirov 475 Pollux 10. 55 TT\V 5^ \j/'fiKTpav... SO0OKX^S iv Oivofidijj ' did....Tptxbs.

The words have been supposed to be addressed by Hippodamia to Pelops (Welcker) or by Oenomaus to Myrtilus P. II.

(Hartung). The former view is better, as it is implied that the person addressed has completed a long journey. Campbell conjectured
9

£O*OKAEOYI

I3O

the preposition is not entirely merged in the instrumental either here or e.g. in Ai. 575 tax* Stck iro\vppd(f>ov GTpifyuiv J ir6piraKos....unv tiriroiv eK

Tpxas 2 Ka8cupov8' is followed by an abl. gen. of separation: cf. Hdt. 1. 44 roc airbs fybvov Im8r)pe, Plut. Mar. 6 \4yerat Kaddpai Xrjffrripiay TTJJ' ( i

476 v alerbs ui/»i7reras q virkp arpvyerov 476.

1 derds codd.

2 &tiiroTadeti)i> Shilleto:fa>iroradd^v

codd.

' over the barren wilderness ' with Har476 Ar. ^4J>. 1337 yevoliJ.av...\ifi.va.s, tung, as if 70(05 or opovs were supwhere the schol. has iv rots KaWctrrpdrov pressed. And, as against the latter view, ravTa &? Oivofiaov TOU ZO0O/CX6>US. it may be added that Sophocles would For the general sense, no doubt a not have employed the Homeric drpiprayer of the Chorus to be transported 7CT0F, for which see Allen and Sikes on to the scene of the victory of Pelops, cf. h. Dem. 67, in a non-Homeric relation. 0. C. 1081 effi deWaia Tax^Ppwo'Tos TreXetcts j aldepias f€(f>e\as Ktipaaifi? KTe. Nauck adopts Kock's i^7rep <:aW4pos> drpvyirov, but inrep aidipos should at Alcman fr. 26 /3dXe 5i) j3dAe Krip6\os dtjv \ 8VTOV iw' drpiyerov Meisterhans p. 33. KO/CO Trka%e)i.(v ovS1 dXaXyjaffcu, Eur. Hec. 2 f. d|nroTa8c£r]V is the certain cor445 are irovroirbpovs KOfxi- \ fas dohs d/cdrection of Shilleto (in Holden's Aristoph. Tovi eir' otSfia XiMi'as, ib. 634 aXioc iv' p. 582 [1848]): it was restored indeol8fj.a vavffTo\i}ffWv, / . T. 395 a£evov iw} pendently by Blaydes (on O. C. 1081). For the optative cf. Ai. 1217ff.yevol^av otdfia Siewipaaev, Hipp. 1273, Hel. 400 ...TCLS lepd-s 6'TTWS irpoueiiroiiiev 'Addvas eV ot8[/.a. nbvTLov yXavKTJs d\bs...d\QfMii, (Jebb's n).—OTpu7^T0ii must go with id. 1501 yXavKov iir' oldfj.' a\iov. \i/j.uas, which thus stands in a double For the metre, which, if the first line relation to the context, unless we prefer were complete, would consist of two to say that it is supplied a second time ianibelegi followed by an iambic dimeter with oW/ta. For similar examples see catalectic, see J. W. White, Verse of Kuehner-Gerth II 564 f. It is imposGreek Comedy, § 496. Blaydes's proposal sible to supply irbvTov with Campbell to drop virip is therefore improbable. or d\6s with Rogers al., or to render

477 yap TOL Ka.veyuo>v opviv irXr/v orav TOKOS 477.

1 \-qdovai Diog. : ir\i)dov
irapfj.

2 iraprj T6KOS Plut.

477 Diog. L . 4. 35 717)05 8i rbv Saveirebuke a usurer who, while a student of GTLK'OV Kal tpi\b\oyoi> elirovTa TI dyvoeiv philosophy, asserted his ignorance in £<pri (sc. Arcesilaus) ' \ifidov
OINOMAOS—TTAAAMHAHI T6KOS, which was intended to signify 560 s 6, fe| T) irXijv. /neXai/owTepos <#6v), as explained by Arist. of 7'. de gen. an. 3 . 1. 7 4 9 1 34, hist. an. 6. 2.

rTAAAMHAHI The epitome of Proclus records {EGF p. 20) the fact that the death of Palamedes was related in the Cypria, but gives no details. Fortunately, however, Pausanias states (10. 31. 2) that he had himself read in the Cypria that Palamedes was drowned on a fishing expedition, and that Diomedes and Odysseus were his murderers. This version does not appear to have been followed by any other extant authority, and it is generally assumed that all the tragedians adopted an alternative account according to which Palamedes was falsely accused of treason by Odysseus. The story, which is most fully recounted by Hyginus {fab. 105), relates 9—2

132

100KAE0YI

how Odysseus plotted revenge against Palamedes for having outwitted him (see p. 115)1. He sent a message to Agamemnon that he had been warned in a dream that the site of the camp should be moved for a single day. Agamemnon gave orders for this to be done, and Odysseus then buried a considerable quantity of gold by night on the spot where the tent of Palamedes stood. He also composed a letter which he gave to a Phrygian prisoner to be conveyed to Priam, and instructed one of his soldiers to intercept him at a short distance from the camp and to kill him. On the following day, when the army had returned, a soldier brought in the forged letter, which he had found on the Phrygian's corpse. The letter purported to be written by Priam to Palamedes, and to promise him the exact amount of gold which Odysseus had buried, if he would betray the camp of Agamemnon according to his engagement. Palamedes denied his guilt, but was convicted on the discovery of the buried gold, and put to death by the whole army. Some of these details are varied by the scholiast on Eur. Or. 432, where Agamemnon and Diomedes are the accomplices of Odysseus, a Phrygian captive with gold in his possession is compelled to forge the letter and is then slain, and a slave of Palamedes is bribed to place the letter and the gold under the bed of his master. Apollodorus (epit. 6. 8) clearly did not follow the Cypria at this point; for he relates that Palamedes was stoned2 to death in consequence of the plot concerted by Odysseus with Agamemnon. That the treason-story was current in tragedy is proved by Polyaen. I prooem. 12 olov Be Katcelvo TaTo<; rdov 'EWr/vcov

i/celvcx; fj\(o 7r/3o8ocrta?. And in Plat. rep. 522 D the appearance of Palamedes eV Tat? rpaywBlaK is connected with a speech which

he seems to have made in his own defence. At any rate a speech of this kind probably occurred in the Palamedes of Aeschylus (fr. 182), as well as in the play of Euripides bearing the same name (fr. 578). It is noteworthy that the corresponding fragments in Sophocles (frs. 479 and 432) are in the third person and that fr. 432 was part of a speech by Nauplius. Thinking that Nauplius could not have been a character in the present play Brunck, followed by Dindorf, assigned both of these passages to the Nauplius (frs. 379, 380 D.). But that is impossible; for the 1 Ahrens lays stress on Vergil's quia bella vetabat {Aen. 2. 83), but we have no reason to connect this detail with Sophocles. The version of Dictys (1. 15) that Palamedes was induced to descend into a well and then buried beneath a mass of stones is certainly not tragic. 2 Stoning is also mentioned by schol. Eur., Philostr. her. 11. 11, Tzetz. Antehorn. 384.

TTAAAMHAHI

133

authority which ascribes fr. 479 to the Palantedes should not be questioned, whether 1 it was that of Polemo or another. It is not so clear that Vater was right in assigning fr. 432 also to the Palamedes; but the recurrence of OUTO? and ifavpe, as well as the general similarity of the two passages, suggests that they both belonged to the same speech. It is, moreover, certain that Nauplius appeared in the play of Aeschylus : fr. 181 TWOS KareK2 TO.
479 ov XifJibv 0VT05 TWVS' evavcre,

criiv 0eq)

tiTreiv, ^povov re Siar/DtySas cro^xurara? i\oLcr/3ov fiera

KOTTOV

KadrjiiivoLS,

vrecrcrovs /cuySov? re reprivov apylas a/cos ; 479. I TUVS' Scaliger: TOVS Eust., Tourb" coni. Herwerden | e'lra.vo-e Herwerden : aTrutxe Eust. 3 xdirov Salmasius: KOTTTJV Eust. 4 7 9 Eustath. / / . p. 228, 6 IlaAa^5ovs €7rivo7jfTa^evov Kv^eiav nai ireTTeiav ev 'IAiy els Trapai/vOiav Xifiov KaTatrx0VT0^ TTJV aTpaTtav \idos e/ce? eSeiKWTo, Kada 1

Ho\4/j.wv iuTopel (see on fr. 429), icj> 08 e'ire'o'o'evov. TTJS de TOLCL6TTIS einvoias TOV HO,\V./IT]§OV$ nai T9}S evpe^aeus de rod xpovov, rjv Kai O,VTT]V enelvos e
de Soph. Alend. p. 27 sq. See also Wagner in Roscher III 25. Such is also the opinion of R. Wagner, Epit. Vat. p. 265. The alternative is to leave fr. 432 for the Nauplius, and to find another speaker for fr. 479. But would not Palamedes have been his own advocate, if the speech belonged to an dyuiv? See also Meineke, Anal. Alex. p. 161. 2

3

134

SO^OKAEOYI

for Troy to fall, and promised that in the meantime his daughters would provide the necessary supplies (FHG 1 94). \I/J.OV...H.KOS;' v. 4 is quoted by Eustath. Immisch maintained (Ph. Mus. XLIV Od. p. 1397, 9 from the Palamedes of Sophocles on the authority of 6 TA irepi 301 ff.) against Welcker (Ep. Cycl. II 107) that the stay at Delos, as well as the 'EMijpi/r^s iratStas ypdij/as. The lastnamed work was written by Suetonius allusion to the OivoTpbiroi, was included in the narrative of the Cypria, and that it (\o(o-|3oi>: 'battle-din. Horn. E 322 Lycophron (and the schol. and Eust. //. e t c ' (J.). If the discovery took place at p. 827, 44 referring to him) the famine was Aulis, it would refer to the storm which at Troy: 581 at Kal (rrpaTov ftoiireivav... prevented the fleet from sailing. In dXdavovffiv 4X$ovo~aL Trore | Itldwvos elsa recent discussion of the word (Class. ffvyarpbs eivacrijpiov, i.e. to 'Volreiov. Phil. V 328) Sturtevant suggests that it In Apollod. epit. 3. 10 their powers are means ' wave, surge,' rather than 'roar,' brieflymentioned after Palamedes'death.' and that ' after buffeting the waves' is [But nothing can be inferred from this, the natural rendering of this passage. as the narrative immediately afterwards 4 iT€ O-ITOVSTJS.—otpvias. The use of this yu&aw, fj.ereire'fj.xpaTO Tas OlvoTpbirovs Sid word, as H. saw, confirms the suspicion TOV IlaXa/ir/dovs, Kal iXdovaat tte TO that Sophocles is alluding to the 'weari'Polrecov £rpe(pov avroOs.' (H.) some time spent at Aulis: Aesch. Ag. Pherecydes related that Anius urged 202 ff. Trvoai...KaK6<7xoXoi...rpi^q} Karithe Greeks to stay with him at Delos faic<w avOos'Apyelwv. This is the eUala. until the tenth year, when it was fated axoX-q of the Iphigenia (fr. 308). irapdyovtri XotpoKXrjv, fis iv SpdfiaTL 6/AWvip.il> T
TTAAAMHAHI—TTANAQPA

135

480 a/ceor/oov 4 8 O Hesych. I p. 96 uKcarpov • $dpficiKov. 2o0o/c\?7S IIaXa/ATj57^. aKco-rpov suggests one of Palamedes'

inventions : cf. aros in fr. 479. The equally isolated d/cearrip is used metaphorically in O.C. 714.

481 8/307TO. 4 8 1 Hesych. I p. 537 Spo-wd' Speirrd. (read as fLpn Spowd), is plausible. Blom2o0<wcX^s Haha/nr/Sri (ira^a/ir/Si cod.). field (on Aesch. Theb. 324) suggested This obscure statement seems to imply ddpoira- aSpewra. On the other hand, that Sophocles used a verbal adjective W. Dindorf advocated Sptavrd (or, as he Spoiros with the meaning ' plucked.' Such seems afterwards to have preferred, a formation is not easily supported by Spwird) • dpevrd from Suid. s.v. dpoiwaanalogy: we have rofids (beside T6/XOS), /c/fw ' vwdyta, rpuyd. Spt/jirrd (al. SpoTrd, but with the active meaning; in comand so Zonar. p. 572) yd.p TO. dptirrd. pounds, where the accent shifts, it is more < f) > ra Spiwava. ' Sponrrd would precommon, as in fier&Tpowos, TroMrpoiros, suppose a verb Spiiirw or Spiitpu; more eirl/TKOiros, eftrKoiros, 65onr6pos. Nor is theprobable than this would be dpvirrd existence of Spoirbs proved by Etym. M. (from Spirt><j>=Spiwru>), which should be 191, 53 fjdros' r, &Kav8a ws irapa. 76 Kvprdsrestored in Galen gloss. Hippocr. xix 94 KvpTos...o!h depirrd (or dpanrd)' ta, for jSaris) (Hdros, KCLI wapa TO dptiroi 5p6iros,6iros. Hence M. which Palamedes interpreted as a sign of Schmidt's view, to which Nauck inclines, the coming plague, recommending the that Spoird is the remnant of some com- army to adopt a vegetable diet : see pound such as (b/x6dpoTra or dpriSpoTraPhilostr. her. n . 5.

TTANAQPA H I4>YPOKOnOI

It is supposed, no doubt rightly, that the subject of this satyr. play was the making of the first woman1, Pandora, and the result for mankind of her arrival. The myth is related in Hes. Op. 60— 105, and less completely in Theog. 570—589. Zeus determined to punish men in retribution for the deceit practised by Prometheus in their favour, when he stole and gave to them the fire which the king of the gods withheld (cf. Theog. 563). So he 1 Hesiod does not definitely say that Pandora was the first woman, but most modern authorities agree with Pausanias (1. 24. 7) that such was his intention. Goettling-Flach, however, on Hes. Op. 47 contend that the allegory figures a change for the worse in woman's character.

136

I04>0KAE0YI

bade Hephaestus to mix earth with water, and to fashion thereout a lovely maiden of divine beauty with human voice and strength ; Athena to teach her woman's handicraft; Aphrodite to endow her with every grace and charm that should compel men's love ; and Hermes to give her shamelessness and deceit. The work of Hephaestus is perhaps referred to in fr. 482. When the woman was thus completely fashioned, she received the name Pandora, because all the Olympians had made her each a gift. Then Zeus ordered Hermes to conduct her and present her to Epimetheus, who, though he had been warned by Prometheus never to accept a gift from Zeus, lest it should be fraught with evil for mankind, disregarded the advice, and discovered his mistake when it was too late. For up to that time men had lived without any form of toil or disease; but the woman, on her arrival, opened the lid of the jar in which all these evils were concealed, and, before she could shut it down again, they all made their escape, and ever since have been wandering over the earth, bringing evil to whomsoever they come. Only Hope remained behind in the jar, when Pandora closed it again. The title indicates that the satyrs in the play appeared as Hammerers, and we must infer that they acted as assistants in the workshop of Hephaestus, while he was engaged in shaping Pandora. The connexion of satyrs with Hephaestus has already been noticed in the Daedalus (1 p. n o ) and the Cedalion (11. p. 9); but there is further evidence of their employment as his workmen. Proclus in his commentary on Hesiod says : §r)cn.v on YlpofxriOev^ TOP TOV ica/cov TTLOOV irapa T5>V crarvpwv Xa/3dv Kal TrapaOe/xevos TCS 'EiTrifirjdel, Trapr/yyeiXe rrjp Ylav&obpav

}j.r) Segaadai, (on Op. 94). Is it rash to conjecture that the authority whom Proclus followed was explaining the text of Hesiod by reference to the play of Sophocles ? Otherwise it is difficult to understand whence he derived the allusion to the satyrs. In two epigrams of the Anthology (adesp. 412, 413 Jacobs) satyrs are described as chained by the feet and working in the smithy of Hephaestus in order to earn their living. In the former of these the forging of the arms of Achilles is mentioned as one of their tasks, and Jacobs conjectured that the work of art which provided the opportunity of the epigrammatist was a representation of some scene from a satyric drama, giving as possible originals the Myrmidons of Aeschylus1, and the 'A^iXXecB? ipao-Tal of Sophocles. But the reference to the armour of Achilles should not prevent us from observing that a plausible reconstruction of fr. 486 is favoured by the words 1

But the Myrmidons was not a satyr-play.

TTANAQPA

137

ci%9n8ioi> Kara KWXOV dXvKTOirehrjai, Xvycodeis and iroMtcporov a/nfia KaduyfrcK; in the epigrams.

The word cr^upoKOTroi may be illustrated by the design reproduced from a lekythos in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris by Miss J. E. Harrison i n / . H. S. XX IO61, where two men (not satyrs), armed with large mallets, are represented hammering the colossal head of a woman. The head is not identified as belonging to Pandora, but that identification is supported by the painting on an amphora in the Ashmolean Museum reproduced by Prof. P. Gardner in / . H. S. XXI 1 ff. Here, however, it is Epimetheus who carries a mallet and gazes at Pandora represented either as rising from the ground or as an incomplete statue. It is possible that the last-mentioned design follows a non-Hesiodic form of the myth, according to which Epimetheus modelled his wife out of clay-; but there is no evidence of any such variant. Miss Harrison, however, undertook to show(/. H. 5. XX 99) that the main subject of the play was the birth of Pandora and not the opening of her jar. For this purpose she emphasized the association of Pandora with the earth-goddess (schol. Ar. Av. 971), and brought her irldo*; into connexion with the iriOoiyia and the release of malevolent Krjpe^. More recently Robert has maintained4 that the satyr-chorus consisted not of hammerers engaged in fashioning vprj\aTa, but of clodbreakers who assisted Epimetheus in freeing Pandora from the earth; that fr. 482 refers not to the modelling of Pandora, but to the making of a woman by Prometheus under her directions ; and that the designs on a lost amphora figured as no. 71 in Miss Harrison's Prolegomena (p. 280) are to be interpreted in the above sense. Even if we admit the possible ambiguity of afyvpoicoTroi, the considerations adduced seem insufficient to oust the probability that Sophocles followed in the main the Hesiodic tradition, with such modifications as might be necessary to adapt it to the conditions of a satyr-play. Moreover, the fashioning by Prometheus of the first mortals out of clay, though combined by the mythographers5 with the story of Pandora, was represented by them as antecedent to her arrival. The difficulties involved in the Hesiodic account, and the origin of the version which made the TTIOOS full of blessings rather than of evils6, cannot be discussed here. 1 2 3 4 e

Also in Proteg. p. 279: see the discussion there of the whole subject. The suggestion is made by Gruppe in Bursians Jb. cxxxvn 588. See also Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 7619 and Mekler in Bursians Jb. cxxix 30. 5 Hermes, xi.ix 17—38. Apollod. 1 45, 46; Hygin. fab. 142. Of course Horn, ii 527 could not be left out of account. See generally A. S. F. Gow in Essays to Kidgeway, p. 99 ff.

IOOKAEOYI

138

482 KCU

irpwTov apxov TTTJXOV opyd^euv

4 8 2 apxov E D V : apxov 6pya$uv Cobeti schedae

> apxov Huschke, apybv Ruhnken | Tn\ov EUV [

but the assonance of three successive 4 8 2 Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 6, 2 (schol. Hippocr. v p. 480 Littre) 6pya.tr- words ending in -OP is against the adop11.6s " 0 fiaXayfios • niiirqrai. rrjs Xi^eas Kal tion of either. The variant dpy&far, 2iotpoK\T]$ ev jlavdujpa X^ytov ' Kal...xepoiv? which Klein reported from Cobet's MS Kal 'ATTIKOI 8i iSlws Xiyovau/ opyaaai. TO collations, perhaps deserves consideration: TO vypa roh fijpoZs fiT^ai Kal avacpvpaaai the sentence may have been continued with some such words as 7rX.a.—irr|\ov opyd^iv: Observe that the language agrees with cf. Phryn. praep. soph. p. 93, 2 (Bekk. HesiorTs description of the creation of Pandora by Hephaestus : Op. 60 "~B.<pai- anecd. p. 53, 31) 6pya£etv TnjX6v rb dta~ arov S iKtXfvcre irepiKXvrbv OTTI Tax^ra \ PpiX^"- oiirw yap TO vypalvew ol apxaioi. Xeyovji. Pollux 7. 165 X^ETai 8£ Kal yalav vdei (ptipetv. TrrjXbv 6pydfetv. But these glosses may d'pxou: see cr. n. Ruhnken's apyov refer rather to Ar. Av. 839 irr/Xbv &Todi>s (afterwards abandoned by its author in favour of apxov: see Tim. p. 180) is opyaaov. See also on frs. 787 and 510The passage in Aristophanes shows that a suitable epithet to express the inert, lifeless clay, and Huschke's dpx6" has the phrase was particularly applicable tothe preparation of mortar or concrete in the advantage of recalling Horace's wellknown principilimo (Carm. 1. 16. 13); building operations.

483 n\rjpe<; €KTTI6VTL ^(p rdvovra ixaXdaicfjs 4 8 3 . 2 TivovTa Emperius: yiixovTa A | ivrjs Musurus

viro. viro Tucker: U7TOXCUJ'I/S A,

on the difficulty ofiw6 if iiX4vris is adopted, has, I think, found the right solution (C.Q. II 203). The allusion to x.Xxtf'"1occurs constantly in descriptions of the ) The second line is manifestly corrupt gaudia Veneris : see the passages quoted Kal vvv Si' o$'out eicoi/iijfl?;, Athen. 219 B, iv T£ ixeBtieiv a'ipuv ava TT)V p.aaxaki\v Prop. 1. 4. 14 gaudia sub tacita ducere d&Beaav Kal X4yeu> fiaaxaXTjv at pea' veste Hbct. For the use of TpLfiu cf. TopvbTpuj/, xo'-porpi^p.—For \piipa * Kal Ti X '

TTANAQPA

139

484 4 8 4 Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 18, for Erotian was not concerned to illus17 (schol. V Hippocr. v p. 204 Littre) trate the use of /SXt0"o*w, and [lXifj.d£eiv, efSXifido-Ori • em-(cr07/ e/jaXdxSv iOXlfiri- employed as a vox amatoria, was obviously suitable to the subject of the Teiv, us'Api.crTo<pavris iv'Opvurl cprio-iv (Av.Pandora. For the latter sense cf. Etym. 529) ' etra Xa{36vTes irwXova' ddpoovs' | M. p. 200, 38 /3Xi/xdfeii'' TO nTffoXafle'iv, of 5' tbvovvTcu f$\ifid£ovTes.' 6fj.oiws Kal ijyovv i//7;\a0ai> rd ar-qdij, Kai TOUS jxaGToiis SO0O/CXT)S [xip.vrjTai rrjs X^£ea/s £v Havdwpa. KaTa\a.fj.[3dveip TTJ atf>rj, /cat dirreadai T&V diroppjjTwv lAtXwv T&V yvvaiKetwv, /cat The grammarians (so also Suid., Etym. M.) derived the word f}\iiMx£eip from 8ieyeipeu> T&S eTn8v/j.las, ufs (ptjai KparTvos (fr. 302, I 100 K.) 'us <5e> /j-aXaicov §Xlaaui (fr. 778); but, so far as we can /cat r4pev TO xpt0T^l0v < ^ J / ) > w ^eot* | tell, they have nothing in common. HowKal yap eflXifia.gov air^v, 17 5' i<j>p6vTi^' ever this may be, Schneidewin was oiSi iv.' Similarly Bekk. anecd. p. 22r, certainly wrong in supposing that the 16. reference quoted above belongs to fr. 778;

485 ivovpijdpa Pollux 10. 44 (ijUts, -rjv 2O
e*v ILavSi&pq. ivovprj&pav

486 can be no doubt on the above evidence that \T]Xeu(j.a meant an awl. The in(7aXeta)dir^Tia 8£ or Sophocles (adesp. 220 N.). Wecklein in Berl. phil. Woch. 1890, 656 went Kal oTr-rp-idLa, a Kal x^XeiVtaTa £K&\OUV ol further, holding that /cex^Xeu/Aat ivbhaz and irotTjTaL, /j.dXio'Ta 8e o!frus wvofiagov (i.e. not xv^evtJ"- is the quotation attributed the word was especially applied to the tools of...) TCIV Tas axolvov! TTXCK6VTWV WS to the Pandora. So also Bapp in Roscher ill 3064. This view, which is possibly Kal Kpdvri (Hdt. 7. 89). Further conright (see p. 136), had already been antifirmation is afforded by Hesych. IV cipated by Ellendt; but the presumption p. 283 X'A"'"' TX^/CEI, pdiTTei, and x'/Xeyis rather the other way.—There is not otov dw/jTLa, oh irXiKovtnv rj pdirTovaiv. sufficient evidence to distinguish and x^Xeuw. L. and S. require correction, for there 486

Hesych. 11 p. 472 /cex^Xw7

e €tl/

IO4>OKAEOYI TTHAEYI Fr. 487 shows that the subject of the play was the fortunes of Peleus in his old age. It cannot therefore have dealt with his purification by Acastus, the lying accusation of the disappointed Astydamia, or the escape of Peleus from his peril on Mt Pelion, although Ar. Nub. 1063 probably indicates that the earlier adventures had been represented on the tragic stage. It is possible that Aristophanes was referring to the Peleus of Euripides1, unless fr. 619 should be held to warrant a different conclusion. The well-known reference in Hor. A. P. 95 {et tragicus plerumque dolet sermone pedestri \ Telephus et Peleus, cum pauper et exul uterque \ proicit ampullas et sesquipedalia

verbd) cannot be attributed with certainty to any one period of Peleus's chequered career; but most readers of Horace have supposed that he was thinking of the exile twice suffered by Peleus in consequence of the deaths of Phocus and Eurytion. In Horn. 2 434 Peleus is said to be worn out by the weight of years, and in O 4882 and X 493 s there are somewhat more definite allusions to the oppression of Peleus by his neighbours, and his inability to protect himself against them. In his abstract of the Cyclic Nosti Proclus states {EGF p. 53) that on the advice of Thetis Neoptolemus returned from Troy by land; that in passing through Thrace he found Odysseus in Maronea ; and that he completed the rest of his journey and buried Phoenix when he died. Then follow the words, CLVTOS Be els MoXoacrou? acf>iic6/j,svo<; avayvcopl^eTai II^A-ei. The clumsiness of the epitomator is sufficiently obvious, but his words certainly seem to imply that the meeting of Neoptolemus with Peleus took place in Molossia. Yet, although there is plenty of evidence to connect Neoptolemus with Epirus4, it is not elsewhere recorded that Peleus removed to that country. That the incidents were in fact entirely separate appears probable from Apollod. epit. 6. 12 f, where, after a reference to the settlement of Neoptolemus in Molossia, it is stated that he succeeded to the sovereignty of Achilles after the death of Peleus, who had been driven out by the sons of Acastus. Other evidence makes the inference certain. Euripides (Tro. 1126ff.)says that Neoptolemus has 1 So apparently Nauck (TGF p. 554); but he is certainly wrong in explaining Eur. Tro. 1117 by reference to the story of Astydamia. 2 KOX nty irov KUVOV irepivaiiTtu dfiipls idi/res \ Telpova', ot)5f? TIS Icrrtv api]i> Kai \oi/ybv aftdpat. 3 eiire 5<- JXOI. II?)Vi)os d/j.u/j.oi'os d TI irivva-ircu, | irj IT' ?x€l Tt^v wokiaiv plxiSbveaoiv, | 7) /uy &TLfjux^ovaiv dv 'E\\c£5a r e # 0 h 4 Pind. Nem. 4. 51, 7. 37.

nHAEYI

141

sailed to Phthia, Kaivds Tti/a? | YlrfXeax; aKovaas ov[jbopd<;, to? vw xQovbs I "A/mo-ro? eK/3e^Xr)Kev 6 tleXiov yovo?. On these words the scholiast comments ; 0 fiev EuptTrtSi;? VTTO 'Aicac-rov cjjtjalv i/cpef3\r)v6
TOP fiiov. We seem to require here an alteration in order that TrpoaeXdetv may be referred to Neoptolemus instead of to Peleus, as will presently appear from the fuller account of Dictys. The schol. Townl. on Horn, il 488 explains: Xeyei Be "AtcaaTov

Kal

TOV<; vlov<; "Ap%av8pov

Kal

Ap%t,TeXr)v.

The

mention of Archander and Architeles introduces an element of confusion, since elsewhere they were called sons of Achaeus, whereas the sons of Acastus are known as Menalippus and Pleisthenes. Consequently Tiimpel2 would substitute 'A-^aioO for 'AKCUTTOV in both places. The question is of subsidiary importance for the present purpose; and we may infer from Euripides that Acastus and not Achaeus must have been the traditional enemy of Peleus. The schol. on Pind. Pyth. 3. 167 appeals to the authority of Callimachus (fr. 372) for the vague and probably corrupt statement o Se Il^Xev? iv 'I«w rfj vrjaa> r i n ^ o - a s TOV /3iW olKTpa*; Kal e7ra>Bvva>'i direOavev.

So D r a c h -

mann reads, with h> 'IKW from several MSS for iv Ka>3. Icus was a small island east of Magnesia and north of Euboea (Strabo 436). It is obvious that rfj '1KO> should also be restored in schol. Eur., and the difficulty of explaining the removal of Peleus to Cos at once disappears. This brings us to the detailed narrative of Dictys (6. 7—9), which has with reason been suspected of coming from a tragic source. Neoptolemus, while repairing his storm-tossed ships in Molossia, learnt that Peleus had been driven out by Acastus. Desirous of avenging his grandsire's wrongs, he sent two of his companions to Thessaly, who returned with a full report of the treachery of Acastus. Neoptolemus at once put to sea, although the weather was unfavourable, and was 4wrecked on the Sepiades—the rock-bound coast of Magnesia —losing all his fleet and most of his men, and himself escaping with difficulty. Here he found Peleus, who had concealed himself in a gloomy cavern in order to avoid further 1

Some, as Bloch in Roscher ill 1843, think that this refers directly to Sophocles. Zusatz in Lief. 22 of Roscher's Lexikon. The correction had been previously made by Wilamowitz (Herm. XLIV 474 f.) on the strength of A. P. 7. 2 i
3

142

ZO^OKAEOYS

violence from Acastus, but was continually on the watch for seafarers, in the hope of obtaining news of his grandson. While he was engaged in preparations for an attack upon Acastus, Neoptolemus learnt that Menalippus and Pleisthenes, his sons, had arrived in the neighbourhood on a hunting expedition. Disguising himself as a native of Iolcus, Neoptolemus announced his own death to the young men, and was subsequently invited to join their party. Thus he obtained opportunities of killing them separately, as well as their faithful servant Cinyras, who arrived with the news that Acastus was on his way to join them. Neoptolemus then changed his disguise and appeared before Acastus in Phrygian dress as Mestor the son of Paris, who had come to Thessaly as a captive of Neoptolemus. Acastus was informed that Neoptolemus was lying asleep in a cave, exhausted by his voyage. He accordingly hurried on to the cave in order to surprise his enemy, but was met at the entrance by Thetis, who had arrived to visit Peleus. The goddess rebuked Acastus for his cruelty to the house of Achilles, but persuaded Neoptolemus to spare his life. Acastus, overjoyed at the unexpected recovery of his freedom, willingly resigned the sovereignty to Neoptolemus. That some authorities should make Icus the scene of Peleus's exile, and others a cavern in the Sepiades, is only such a variation as we are accustomed to meet with in the heroic legends. It would be idle to pretend that there is a strong case in favour of the contention that the whole of the material in Dictys was taken from the plot of Sophocles1. But certain of its features, such as the appearance of Thetis to compose the feud, are unmistakably dramatic; and there is no other play which has so good a claim to be considered its ultimate source as the Peleus of Sophocles. Welcker proceeded to identify the Peleus with the Pkthiotides, but his arguments are quite unconvincing, (i) He makes the unnecessary and unjustifiable assumption that Archander and Architeles were sons of Peleus by a former marriage, and that they had driven out and ill-treated their father, who was in his dotage. The object of this is to work in fr. 696s. (2) He strangely supposes that fr. 694 was addressed to Peleus by the speaker of fr. 487- It is of course possible that Peleus in exile was visited by a chorus of women from Phthia, but a female chorus generally indicates that a woman plays the leading part. Besides, the proposed identification would compel us to make 1

See Welcker, p. 205 ff.; Gruppe, p. On p. 257 he makes the extraordinary conjecture that iv Spa/ian in vit. Soph. 7 (p. lii Blaydes) refers to the Peleus. This needs no refutation. 2

TTHAEYI

143

the violent assumption that Aristotle in poet. 18. 1456s 1 gave as examples of tragedies of character the Peleus of Euripides coupled with the Phthiotides (= Peleus) of Sophocles. It is far more likely that the titles were distinct, and that Aristotle cited two plays of Sophocles. That the Peleus was produced before B.C. 424 follows from fr. 487 (n.). 487 TOV AiaKtiov OLKovpos fJ.6vq yepovrayoiyS} KdvawaiSevco vd\iv Trakiv yap aides wals 6 yrjpdcrKcov dvrjp. 4 8 7 . 1 AiaKeiov Sylburg : Aidfciov codd. Clem, et Tryphonis nonnulli codd.

2 /cat avairaidevu} (om. iraKiv)

487 Clem. Alex, strom. 6 p. 748 2 YcpovTcryaiYu seems to have been 2o(poic\4ovs & rifj Il^Xet " Hr}\€a....aptfp.' a coinage of Soph, after Trcu.bayoiyw, rev. 2 is frequently attested: schol. Ar. Eq. peated twenty years later in O. C. 348. 1099 (/cat VVV ip.avrbv eiri-rp^TTdj trot rov- In the meantime it caught the fancy of TOVI I yepovraywyeiv KavairaideOeLP trdKiv) the comic poets (v. supr.). In the line o\ov 5e rb lafi^iKOv irapiparjaev dirb TOV quoted by Plut. avafjuadapveiv is either Hr)\4as 2o<poK\4ovs. Trypho rhet. v n i ' to get pay once more,' i.e. as a dicast, p. 741 Walz u)s irapa 2o0o/cX« ' yepovTa- after having been put on the shelf; or 'yioyu KavaTaiSeoii) ird\Lf.' Cocondrius perhaps refers to a constant succession of rhet. VIII p. 784 Walz rat 2O0OKX7;S d7ro profitable services.—dvairaiSeiiu irdXiv TOO iraibayoryGi yepovTayoryu. Plutarch is pleonastic, like ^erayvwvai iriXiv in (Nic. 2 and praec. ger. reip. 13 p. 807 A) Phil. 1270. Logically no doubt a distwice quotes the line yepoi/Tayuyui* Kava.- tinction may be made, in so far as 7rdXti' Jjuix8apye2y dtSovi, evidently from some denotes reversion to an earlier state and comic poet (adesp. fr. 11, ill 400 K.). dva- repeated action (Ellendt) ; but this 1 IliiXe'a: for the synizesis cf. Eur. is to refine too much. So ira\iv adBis in Phoen. 913 a<pa^at Mecot/cea rbvde, At. £04 '05v
3 is a metrical rendering of the time<Jebb).—AICLKUOV: the adj. takes the worn proverb 51i TratSei ol ytpovres place of the normal gen. Aiaxov. Cf. (Diogen. 4. 18). This passage appears Ai. 134 TeXa/iwete 7rat. O.T. 267 Ttp to be the earliest allusion to it in literaAajidaKei(ji iraiSi. The idiom is Homeric : ture, with the possible exception of see on Eur. Hclid. 192, Phoen. 188, 225, Cratin. fr. 24 (1 20 K.) rpi ap' dX-rjOris 6 1063. Copious illustrations are given by \6yos 01s dls TTCUS yepuv. Cf. Ar. Nub. Blaydes on O.T. I.e., and Kuehner\\l*l £yoi di y' dvreliroLfj.' h.v cos 5t? Gerth 1 261 f.—oixovpos (idvt] emphasizes •waiSts ol yepovTes. Antiphon ao(p. fr. his destitution: he has none other to 136 B. [fr. 66 D.] yrjporpofpia yap irpoatoiKG give him tendance. But I think it also Trai5oTpobv /caret TT)V irapoiixlav ircus TrdXtv yeyovws. T£KVWV oUovpbv.

IOOKAEOYI

TO /AT!) yap elvoLL Kpelcraov 17 TO Ifiv 488 Hense)

Stob. flor. 121. 9 (iv p. 1101, XOC)>OK\4OVS

tfv KO.KQS; Hec. 377 Bavlav 5' &v e'irf eirvx^crepos (scil. the eiyevf/s, where he has met with calamity) | rf

IITJX&IJS" 'TO IK>\.••IwXKov

Kaniot.' S does not give the name of the play, and M omits the extract altogether. Cf. Aesch. fr. 90 fiiov irovripov Savant etf/cAectrrepos, fr. 401 £*WT}S Trovrjpds davaros aiperdrepos (where see Nauck). Eur. fr. 361 tyio Se TOI)S KaXws reBvqKbras | £ijy tprjfil fj.d\\oy rov ^K^iretv TOUS fiij /caXu)s. fr. 596 oix oSv rb /j.ri £ijv Kpetcabv ear' ff

£G)v'

TO yap %rjv fj,i] /caXiS

^y

6

Apollod. fr. 6 (ill 289 K.) 01) $piif elpf TOO frjv rjv bpu | Kpeiaaov TAfj.ii ffiv, xp^oixai TI? KpelTTOvi. Philemon, fr. 203 (ill 532 K.) Saveiv &fnar6y (? dfieivov) icrrui rj ffiv (r)v fgs Mein.y a0\las. The same sentiment is more fully expressed in fr. 952 (n.).

489

nearer to the original meaning (Kvplois ri> 4 8 9 Ar. Av. 851 ' 6fj.oppo8Q...lxu,' I poabSia fieyiXa ae/xva vpoaiivu deolviv • a/ia Kai (TViMpthvws ipiffireiv). But at the LT same time we cannot exclude the possifia 5^ Trpoo'h't x&P °s eveKa j irpofiaTLov I Biuv. The scholl. give 6ft.oppo8G> •bility that the emphatic repetition of the e/c IlijXfWS" avrl TOV TO airb notion of assent was the point of the pp In R however, TOVTO £K IIIJX^WS parody from the Peleus. This is to some extent confirmed by the frequency with is an interlinear comment attached to irpbfiaTov (v. 855). which ?xw a n < i t n e aor. part, are employed in Sophocles as a periphrasis for the It is quite uncertain, as Nauck remarks, perfect indicative: see the examples how much belongs to Sophocles. The scholiast does not necessarily mean more quoted by Goodw. § 47, Kuehner-Gerth than that the word bfxoppodw was used by 11 61. The idiom occurs in a chorus at Sophocles in the sense of ' I assent,' as Ant. 794 ert) KOX r65e vetKos avdpwv ^vvai^ov also in Ant. 536 elirep 7/5' bfxoppodei. The ^X"s rapdi-as. Rutherford concludes that transference may well have been a neo- several lines of the Peleus were parodied logism, for Eur. Or. 529 comes niuch in vv. 851—857.

490 ITQ)

Se

/Soa

4 9 O ITW ter repetunt codd. : corr. Bentley (cum U et Aid.) | r £ 6e$ codd.: corr. Bentley 4 9 O Ar. Av. 857 tra trw Ira Si Jlvdias /3o& rip 8e$. Bentley corrected as above in order to-make the line agree with the antistrophic v. 901, and is followed by most modern editors. The schol. has: HvSias fjod' ri per' ai\ov ywo\tivi\ fioi), TO \iti810v fi(\os. tvdev nal TrvdatiXr/s ytverat. ourco 5£ ?Xe70i/ rbv vaiavu. Kal rovro di in Hr)\(ws.

ITW: ' raise the loud Pythian cry.' Cf. Track. 207 Koivbs apaivwv Ira /cXayyd. Eur. El. 879 Iroi JtWuXos (Soa xaPtfr. 773, 58 tra reKela yd/xoiv dotod. / . A. 1470 tra Si AavatSais eitprnda. Aesch. Theb. 947 tria 760s, trot 5&npv. Eur. Ion 1096 TraKifnpafj.0^ aoiSa \ Kal fiouo~' eh av&pas frw. Ion eleg. fr. 2, 7 (PLG II 253) Trlvujxev, iralfaftfv, tru 81a VVKTOS

TTHAEYI aoidr). Vater not unreasonably inferred that the triumphal song was raised in honour of the return of Neoptolemus and the rescue of Peleus.—We conclude that IlvSids pod was a paean in honour of Apollo, accompanied by the flute : Ar. continues . Pollux 4. 81 says that flutes suitable for paeans are

145

called ol HVBIKOL • ijtfXow Se TO &xopov aOX-qixa, rb JIV0LK6V. Trv8ati\i)s, men-

tioned by the schol., was the name given to the flute-player in the Pythian nome: Smyth, Greek Melic Poets, p. LXI. Cf. /SGI•/$•], ed. Kaibel, 1890. But nothing so elaborate as the Pythian nome described in Pollux 4. 84 is contemplated here.

491 Toipa TOLV

vtriprovov

f3odv. and his scholl. The same words are also quoted in the scholia as occurring in theSatyri of Phrynichus (fr. 46, I 382 K.), and there must, it would seem, have been The authenticity of this fragment is something in them which tickled the doubtful, since schol. R has Ei)piiri5ou Attic fancy as expressive of a very loud in place of 2O(J>OK\4OVS preceded by rapa cry. Probably inriprovoi suggested the TO 4K IITJWWS, and continues iwupipa. fortissimo of a musical score : cf. relvo), ydp' lui irtikaiuiv rj T:S €V dofj-OLs : see Eur. T6VOS. Its only appearance elsewhere in fr. 623. There is clearly some error, but tragedy is as applied to the blast of the it is impossible to ascertain how it arose. Tyrrhenian trumpet (Aesch. Eum. 572). Wilamowitz (7>. Gr. fragg. p. 27) thinks —Bergk conjectured fiodaon' apa (&pa schol. V should be followed, since the Aid.). play of Soph, is elsewhere copied by Ar.

491 Ar. Nub. 1154 ' fiodaop.
492 TTJ? 492 Steph. Byz. p . 257, 9 AiiTtoc, TTOAIS OetriraXlas...6 TTO\ITT)S Awrieis...Tb 0rj\vnbv ... Aoirids, (is TXicis TOO 'IXietfs. 2O0OKXT)S iv H-qXei ' f3acn\evs...AaTidSos.'

For Dotion see on fr. 380. It may be that Acastus (or his son), as hereditary

AwrtaSos

lord of Iolcus, would have been described as king of Dotion, since Dotion was reckoned as being within the conBnes of Magnesia, to which Iolcus also belonged (Strabo 436, 442).

493 xpevaov,

cu Zev,

/JLT] /JL eXr/s

Schol. Ar. Thesm. 870 (/IT) 493 xlievaov, <3 ZeO, T^S e7rioi/a-7)s e\iriSos) ativqM MfravSpos (fr. 916, III des TO axhi -

dvev 2O0OKX?)S nr)Xci.

Kal

'/ii;

\pevaov.' It was formerly supposed that Sophocles used /XT; vb^iaov as well as /u,i) xj/evffov in the Peleus. But it is much 238 K more probable that the text of the Antiil/evo-ov...5opbs.' Antiatt. IITJXCI ' av atticist has been dislocated, and that (Bekk. a'necd.) p. 107, 30 refers to this vlnuaov was originally cited from the passage as follows : /"? vbtiiaov • dvrl TOO 10 P. II.

146

IO<1>OKAEOYI

'without (using) the sword,' i.e. far from the battle; it is the prayer of the old warrior to hear once more the clash of arms. Of course Zeus is not thought of TOO iii) vofdow OBTW OovKvdlSris (QayerlSris Suid. : Qovyevi5r}S is due to Pierson on as the actual agent, but as the ultimate cause. On the other hand, Sbpv has not Moeris, p. 334). Owing to some similar yet reached the meaning ' war' or confusion Suid. s.v. ij/tvaov quotes the 1 battle' so decisively as e.g. in Eur. Ion verse of Aristophanes as if it had been 997 8eav ST' fjX6ei> is dbpv (Wilamowitz written by rather than adapted from on Eur. Her. 158), although a spear is Sophocles. not necessarily the weapon intended any |«j \|/eua.
494 494 Harpocr. p . 134, 1 ^i}pa\oi
Lobeck, Phryn. p. 572) ourws eX^yero. 2O0OK\TJS IIi)Xe( ' Kal...TTVX&v.' This is our best authority for the meaning of the archaic word ^tjpaXoL^iv, which hardly occurs except in allusion to the law of Solon forbidding slaves to frequent the gymnasia, as in Aeschin. I.e. That it had passed out of use in the fourth century is indicated by the fact that the orator, referring to the omission from the law of an express enactment of the licence implied in its veto, proceeds: KttX ovKin Trpoaiypaij/e' rbv 8' iXeidepov aXel(f>ea6ai xa.1 yvp.v&£ecr6a.i.. T h e explanation of Didymus is preserved also by E u s t a t h . / / . p . 764, and by Hesych. Ill p . 170; and £r}pbs idpd>s, b (AT) vird XoOrpov dXV inrb yvfxvafflwv Kal irbviiiv yivb[j.evos

(Plat. Phaedr. 239 c), is adduced in

support. The origin of the word would then be due to the earlier use of oil as an unguent exclusively in connexion with the bath. An alternative view, but inferior in authority, is preserved by Etym. M. p. 612, 20 ( = Bekk. anecd. p. 284, 1) TO £v rat's TaXalvrpcus yvfiva^bfxtvov Kbvei xpV"^aii with which may be compared Lucian Anach. 2 airol eicbvTes iTra/iuwTcu TT\V Kbviv aXeKTpvbvwv SLKTJV, tbs atfivKTorepoi eTei> iv rats h ofjitai, rijs ^d/x/iov rbv bXiaSov Kai pefiawTipav iv £-rip$ vapexoiffi]! rr\v avTlXTj\jjiv. H e r m a n n - B l u e m n e r , Gr. Pri-

vatalt., p. 213, reconciles the two statements on the ground that, whereas oil was used together with water in bathing, Kbvn was not; and therefore the mention of Kbvis)( water is intended to distinguish S-TlpaXoicfeeTv from

xurXuiffai" fier'

iXatov

Xotiaaodai (Hesych. IV p. 301). The distinction is clearly marked in Galen XI 532: in taking abath, the water remains on the surface; so it has to be rubbed into the pores with oil, oirep &vbna$ov oi TraXtuol x^XoDo-Sai Kal avrerWeffdv ye

TTHAEYZ—nOIMENEI 6 £ripa\oie'it>. But

d\e(0

served equally well to describe either process, unless it was necessary to express the opposition between anointing after bathing and at the gymnasium. Inasmuch as the use of oil was always prescribed for the latter, it is odd to find Philostr. gymn. 58 condemning JijpaXoi(peiv together with xupia
147

Here we must apparently translate ' anointing (himself) through the folds of his tunic'; and Sophocles is guilty of an anachronism in referring to the heroic age a practice which Thucydides (1. 6) states to have been introduced by the S p a r t a n s : iyvii.viSi9r]i!(u> re Trpwroi, Kal e's TO <j>avepbv dirodii'Tcs \lira fiira TOV yv/j.vd-

feTO. But, if we are justified Jlithner in drawing the inference apart from the can only explain it by supposing that context, it would seem that in mentioning Philostratus misunderstood the obsolete an athlete as clothed Sophocles supports term as if it referred to the anointing of the authority of Thucydides, afterwards the dry sweat which was excited by the confirmed by Plato (rep. 452 C), that the irvplaais. The same critic holds that complete stripping of the body was unfrpoTpifleiGdai denotes a dry rub, and is known to the Homeric Greeks. not to be confounded with ^ripaKoi.<j>eiv. to TTJS dypoiKoHpas yvfj.vatrTi.Kfis.

495 495 Steph. Byz. p. 392, 5 KIMCMTW i;s 6 KtWos ifiaal'Kevtje. 2,O(poK\rjs iv

'Avavpov

IlijXe?. Meineke wished to add x^P &eTTa\ias before ys, but, whether he is right or not, the reference is undoubtedly to the Thessalian district infested by the robber Cycnus, the son of Ares, who was slain by Heracles. Thus the reference fits in with the topography of the play. Hesiod (Sent. 70) brings Cycnus to the precinct of Apollo at Pagasae. The same neighbourhood is definitely named by Eur. Her. 389 6.v re M^XiaS' aKTav \

dftaxr f naming Thessaly, go farther afield : thus Itonos in Achaea Phthiotis is mentioned as the scene of the fight with Cycnus by Apollod. 2. 155, Diod. 4. 37, and Nicolaus of Damascus fr. 55 (FHG III 389); but Pausan. 1. 17. 6 puts it in the neighbourhood of Peneus.—Stephanus confused Cycnus with his namesake : see on fr. 499.

a

KTB.V I 6£

Trapa

irqyas \ KIJKVOV fewoSai", 'Afj,<pai>al-1 1 as otK-f/rop' p i hil ill while still Later writers, i

496 496

Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 106, Sophocles used the word in any other

L. and S. erroneously quote the reference in support of the meaning, to fail in courage. There is no evidence that

than its ordinary sense, to faint. The degraded form Xairo^vx^", impossible in verse, still lingers in many prose texts: see Cobet, N.L. p. 79.

nOIMENEI The TLoi./u,eve<; comprised the events which immediately succeeded the first landing of the Greeks upon the Trojan coast, and thus occupied the interval between the*Zvvhenrvoi,and the 'E\eV»?9 d-iraiTTja-ii1. Such at least was the order of the narrative 1

See however I p. 1-21 for another view. 10

2

I48

ZO*OKAEOYZ

in the Cypria, if we may judge from the abstract of Proclus {EGF p . 19): enreira aTroj3aivovTa<; avToix; et? "IXiov e'lpyovo-iv 01 Tpwes, Kal dvrjcricei UpcorecrlXao'; v r 'E«Topo?. eVetTa ' A ^ t W e v ? avrovs rpeTrerai avekwv K-VKVOV rov Hovo<;, ical rovf vetcpov<;

dvaipovvrai. According to Apollodorus {epit. 3. 29 ff.), Thetis had warned Achilles that the first man who landed must die. The Trojans, hearing of the arrival of the Greeks, advanced under arms to the coast, and prevented their landing by volleys of stones. Protesilaus was the first to step on shore, and killed several of the Trojans before he was himself slain by Hector. Then Achilles landed with the Myrmidons, and killed Cycnus by striking him on the head with a stone. The Trojans were scared by his death, and retreated to the city. That the death of Protesilaus and the episode of Cycnus belonged to this play appears to be established by frs. 497, 499, and 500, and the inclusion of fr. 501 is the natural consequence. Fr. 498 shows that Hector was one of the characters. On the question whether Andromache also appeared see I p. 78. It is not known whether the story of Laodamia was related in the Cypria ; but it is barely possible that it was included in the Uoifieves, which was constructed from the Trojan standpoint1. Welcker2 suggested that the action took place outside a temple on the sea-coast, where Hector was surprised by the sudden arrival of the enemy. Frs. 502 and 503 are with reason assigned to the speech of a messenger who related the approach of the Greek fleet, and fr. 504 probably occurred in the same context. The chorus consisted of Phrygian shepherds, whose pastoral labours were rudely interrupted by the fear of invasion. Frs. 505, 515, 519, and 521 are thus entirely appropriate to their character. For the same reason Welcker ascribed to this play frs. 793 and 812. It was probably not until after Hector's departure for the spot whence danger threatened, that Cycnus appeared upon the scene. This famous warrior was the son of Poseidon, and the king of Colonae, a town in the Troad opposite to Tenedos3. The dazzling whiteness of his complexion—obviously suggested by his name4—was probably mentioned by the author of the Cypria, as may be legitimately inferred from Theocr. 16. 4 9 ( T W av) dfjXvv 1

airb XP0^

KiWoi> eyvw,

| el pr) <J>V\6TTtSa?

Otherwise Gruppe, p. 6i5 14 . pp. 113—117: Ahrens however thought that the rustics must have fled in panic to the city at the first alarm of war, and that the appearance of Andromache shows decisively that Troy was the scene of the action. 3 Strabo 586, Diod. 5. 83, Pausan. 10. 14. 1. The king of Colonae and father of Tennes is by many authorities treated as a separate personage. 4 For the probable development of the legend see Wilamowitz on Eur. Her. n o . 2

TT0IMENE2

149

p p vfivrjaav doiBoi; At any rate, something of the kind was known to Hesiod (fr. 119 Rz.) and Hellanicus {FHG I 49), and we need not hesitate 1to suppose that Sophocles also made it part of his description . The victory of Achilles over Cycnus was reckoned amongst his most celebrated achievements: see Pind.11 01. 2. 91, Isth. 5. 39. Similarly Aristotle (rliet. 2. 22. 1396 18), coupling the death of Hector with that of Cycnus, explains why Achilles earned peculiar distinction through the defeat of the latter : he was invulnerable (aTpwro?), and stopped the disembarkation of the army. The legend that Cycnus was invulnerable was unquestionably old, and a fragment which has come to light since the publication of Nauck's second edition (fr. 500) proves that it was known to Sophocles. There were similar 3stories concerning the invulnerability of Ajax and Achilles , which have been shown to be early; and the immunity of Ajax was recorded by Aeschylus3. In all such cases arpmrot meant not so much indestructible as impervious to spear or sword4; and that is no doubt the reason why we meet the tradition that Cycnus was crushed by a stone. That may have been the version of the Cypria* and it was still retained by Lycophron6; but there were others who were not unnaturally dissatisfied with such a crude device. For it is unlikely that Ovid, who describes the combat at length {Met. 12. 72 ff.), drew entirely upon his own invention, when he made Cycnus trip over a stone, and Achilles throttle him by drawing tight the strap of his helmet {ib. 140 ff.). Did he take a hint here from Sophocles? That Cycnus behaved as a somewhat arrogant boaster seems to be indicated by fr. 501, and perhaps by fr. 507. Ar. Ran. 963 implies that Aeschylus put Cycnus on the stage, but, as no confirmatory evidence is extant, it remains doubtful whether the statement applies to the son of Ares or the son of Poseidon. Hermann7 inferred from the character of the fragments that the Hoifieves, if not a satyr-play, was scarcely a serious tragedy, and that it belonged to the class of tragi-comedies to which the Alcestis of Euripides has often been assigned. That the play 1 Seneca probably borrowed from a dramatic source: Tro. 191 Neptunium \ cana nitentem ferculit iuvenem coma. Ag. 216 nivea proles Cycnus aequorei dei. 2 Perhaps in the Aelhiopis: Grappe, p. 6181. 3 See Jebb's Ajax, p. XVIII. 4 This is made quite clear by reference to Horn. $ 568, Eur. Phoen. 594, Hel. 810. 5 Gruppe, p. 671. 6 v. 233 : I cannot see why von Holzinger seeks to avoid the natural interpretation of the words. 7 Philol. II 135. His view is supported by Wecklein {Silzungsb. k. bayr. Akad. 1890, I p. 13). See however Decharme, Rev. £t. gr. 1899, p. 296.

20*0KAE0YI

150

contained comic touches is undeniable, but there is no ground for affirming that its general character was satyric rather than tragic.

497 [6 ITpwrecrtXeajs VTTO TOV *E/CTO/>OS have been so described. The mythologists and later writers follow the account of the Cypria: Apollod. epit. 3. 30, Hygm. fab- 103, Lucian dial.mort. 23. 1, The death of Protesilaus by the hand Ov. Met. 12. 67 Hectoreaprimus fataliter of Hector was related in the Cypria Aasta, I Protesilae, cadis. J. A. Scott (EGF-p. 19). Horn. B 701 Tbv b" licrave AdpSavos dv7]p vabs airoBpipGKOVTO. iroXi) (Class. Philol. v n i 165) makes use of this evidence in order to show that Hector TpdiTKjrov 'AXGUUP does not give the n a m e did not belong to the pre-Homeric traof his opponent; .but Aristarchus (Lehrs, dition. p. 188) concluded that Hector could not 497

Schol. Lycophr. 530 luTopei Be

2O0OK\?)S tv Hoi/ifoiv iiri TOV "EicTopos avaipe09jvcu TOV ilpuTealXeuv.

498 tjavfjcrcti, KCLL TTpoyvfivdcrou numbing influence of cold on the fingers), the only other place in which it appears to occur. Here we must take x^P° with H d ) 2 \ 0i ) M ao) Herwerden). Trpoyv/j.vdo-a.1 only, but if the order had "•EitTtop TOIS 'Axaiots (3ov\6/j.ei'os fidxeaBai been reversed it would have been natural (prjffiv 'i]Si...x^pa-' Phot. lex. p . 307, 14 a as internal object to faeijcrai. and Suid. s.v. ^avijaei • rondrei, Hesych. to treat x^P Tr. ' It is pleasant to tire from labour and Ill p . 168 ^avijaai • Koiri&ffai, I p . 253 to practise the arm.' The aor. is inaTrolavav Ka.Koira.deiv. T h e verb is thus gressive. For the class of verbs in explained by Suid. s.v. £arai>" irovuv roi)s question see Rutherford, New PhryKapirovs ras yvvaiKas TS>V xeipuv Sia. avvexv nichus, p. 153, where fopS is omitted. TWV ipiwv ipyacriav. Cf. Poll. 7. 30 TO 6"e The pleasure is that of the athlete, whose Kdfieiv airb -rijs ipiovpylas ras xe?pas Ja^ac muscles are slack from disuse, in again iXiyero. The grammarians, therefore, submitting to the stiffening of hard exermake it an intransitive disease-word, cise.—Hilberg's objection (Princip d. properly said of women whose wrists Silbenwagung, p. 215) to the scansion of ache from carding wool (i-alvur); and T)S6 as a spondee cannot be approved: it is used intransitively in Nicand. Ther. see on fr. 873. 383 i)5' oirorav vetipuv favdg. Kexa-Xacr/xiva de
s.v.

Phot. lex. p. 307, 17 and Suid.

f avd • K0iridc7G> ((Kotn&oi or Zavr/aa •

499 KVKVITLV 499 S t e p h . Byz. p . 392, 6 KVKV1TI.S ...2O0O/CA?JS ev IIi;X« (fr. 495). rai (v Iloi^ie0"i ' ^07]V KvKVlTtV.'

It has been thought that Poijv is corrupt; but neither Ellendt's 7ii7)c, which is masculine, nor Wecklein's x^ya has

any probability. O.C. 1057 might be cited in defence of the text. Headlam adduced Pindar's KvKvda. /J.&XV (of the other Cycnus) 01. 11. 15. As Stephanus has in any case confused two different persons, it does not seem unlikely that

TTOIMENEI his second illustration was still more irrelevant as not being directly concerned with locality at all. It is true that, as Cycnus is not a place-name, we can hardly compare Eur. Phoen. 301 ^olviaaav (Sodx; but the termination of the adjective may have been intended to suggest a local dialect. At least there is no obvious

reason why KUKWTIS should have been preferred to KvKvcta: late examples, like Galen's <papfia.KiTis /3(/3Xos referred to by

Lobeck, Paralip. p. 52, do not count. The country of Cycnus was Colonae or Colona on the coast of the Troad opposite to Tenedos: Diod. 5. 83. Pausan. 10. 14. 2.

500 ov

ov

a7rreTai

5 0 0 Aristarch. comm. Hdl. r. 215 (Amherst Pap. II [1901] p. 3), col. ii 13

(TiS^py dk ovd' apyvpip xP&vrai] ^O
The reference is clearly to the invulnerability of Cycnus, for which see Introductory Note.—The mention of \aX.Kos

together with o-£8i]pos points to the general use of the former for weapons of offence in the heroic age, although aldr/pos was not entirely unknown in the construction of cutting or piercing instruments : see Leaf on Horn. S 34, Monro on T13, andCauer, Grundfragen 2, p. 284 ff.

50i /cat fir) t vf$pit,a>v avr'iK e/c fiddpcov eXco pVTTjpl

KpOVCOV yXoVTOV

VTTTLOV 7To8oS

5 O 1 . 1 Kal p.'qv Brunck, /cat /j.ri
Hesych. i n p . 437 pvT-rjpi. Kpoiwv.

thus requires the retention of ?Xu. Cf. E u r . El.

OVK eirl rod KVKVQV dXX' e7rt T£>V TroXe^/w^,

ware elvat rbv \oyov, VTTTLip TToSl

TOUS ISlOVS

yXoVTOVS

7T0l7}(T(i}

Tiirreiv. Photius lex. p. 493, 13 quotes the second line with the name of Sophocles attached to it. Welcker's ascription of the lines to the Iloi^eVes is accepted by Nauck, and is almost certainly right: see Introductory Note. 1 Kal (iij. The recovery of the true reading is very difficult in the absence of the context, but the following points may be noted. (1) The style of the passage and the word vPpClfwv are entirely in keeping with the character of a boaster who considered himself invulnerable, although Welcker's reference to Tzetz. Antehom. 257 in this connexion is an error. (2) Brunck's Kal /U,T]V...(T' 4XG> is an attractive conjecture which J. was inclined to approve; but the key to the solution lies in recognizing that ex means funditus, 'utterly,' and

608 cii 5', 4K f56.6pwv yap

TTSS

dvyprjaat 0tXots, which is sufficient to justify the metaphorical use. Lycophr. 7 7 0 p.e\a8pov

&pb~T]v EK (idOpttif

av6.GTa.rov,

of Odysseus' home in Ithaca, does not imply literal destruction. Similarly A.P. 15.

22.

4 xpVCT0@a
5 ' iarvcp^Xi^

etc

6ep.iB\av HvaKras (misunderstood by Edmonds, Gr. Bucol. Poets, p. 489). The literal meaning is common : A.P. 9. 97 elaen Tpoirjv depK6p.e9^ €K flddpwv iraaav 4p€nro/xev7}v, Pollux 1. 12 in fi&Opwv dva-

cnracrcu (vcwv). Dio Chrys. 37. 42. We cannot therefore render ' I will drive (you)...from your station' (J.), as if J3ddpav referred to 'the position of the Greeks on the rocks near the coast (fr. 502 irapaXlav Trerpav: cp. Ph. 1000 777? rod' aiireivbv j3ddpov).' (3) We conclude

that the corruption is limited to the opening syllables, and that Kal pj] a' or a
152

IO*OKAEOYI

O.C. 900 quotes Praxiphanes, the Periof M. Schmidt (see cr. n.) rests on a patetic and pupil of Theophrastus, as comparison of Apostol. 12. 63 (Paroem. II 557) $\tp TTOSI " iirl TWV Tax^ois re iroioiv- having explained pvriipos in cnreiSeiv dirb piiTijpos by (3Xai>Ti;s, &KO6UV TO &TT68T)/M TWV, 6/xola rrj lo\<j) purist.' But the otov TWV iroSdv TO K6Xv/j./xa. N o doubt, phrase has no place in this context. as J. remarks, he derived the word from 2 pvnijpi. The simplest and best pieadai = 'protector' of the foot. Hence explanation of the passage is that pvrqp Meineke (O.C. p. 211), with the approval means a lash, as in Ai. i\i and elseof Nauck, takes the word here as = calwhere, with -UITTCOV iroSds as genitive of ceus, the shoe or sandal: cf. fr. 527 definition, i.e. (consisting of) the flat of irapiLppv/M TTOB6S ( n . ) . (2) C a m p b e l l the foot. The burlesque tone was no understands, ' the hardened sole of the doubt in character. Pollux 9. 126 exfoot,'—compared to a piece of hide. plains paffaTrvyifciv (Ar. Eq. 796) as the game crifiq T$ -rroSi rbv yXovrbv iraieiv, (3) Hesych. records an alternative view, to the effect that Cycnus threatens to —an explanation which goes back to make his foe run so fast as to strike his Aristophanes (fr. 82 Nauck). To some own buttocks with upturned feet. In such form of horse-play Sophocles apthat case for the use of Kpoiuv see on pears to allude: was it anything like fr. 620. ' running the gauntlet' ? Other explanations are as follows: (1) The schol. on

502 yd-p, irpiv TIV avknoiv bpav, 6ak\6v xifjLOLLpats irpo(T(f)€p(ov veocnrdSa eTBov (TTpaTou crreC^ovTa uapaklav Trerpav. 5O2. 1 avKirSbv Bekker: avKi]TCiv Harpocr., Ath. 2 xilJLahals Nauck: X'patpu Ath., xi\ia vel xiXicus Harpocr. I veotnr&Sa, Casaubon: yeiiraiSa Harpocr., vios irat&a Ath. 3 irirpav Harpocr.: &Kpav Ath. 5 O 2 Harpocr. p. 130, 16 'Savviov... early that none of the farm-servants saw 'AiroW65iopos tv TQ irepl eraip&v Alya me '; or ' so early that none of them was \iytu0ai. (prjirl rairy\v TTJV eralpav dia. TOvisible.' It is against the former that GaWov TOV KfavrfKov Karatpayeiv' HTL yd.p we only need a mark of time, and there 6a\\y xalp°<"'iv al ofyes, KO.1 2o(poK\ijs was no reason why the goat-herd should U.oi/j.4.' Athen. 587 A S ye 2o0oinduced Meineke to substitute irepav for K\T}S iv UOL/J,4<TIV OTL da.Wotpayt'i rb £tyoj>bpav.—avAiTuv. Hesych. I p. 322 has cjyqaiv OVTWS ' ioidivbs,..ILicpav.' The ulti- ai>\i)T7)v' TOV TOV Kbirpov iiri/j.e\otj[jLevov mate source of both quotations was TUIV Trpop&Twt'. This was corrected by Apollodorus of Athens, the famous Meineke (on Steph. Byz. p. 146, 10) to grammarian of the second century B.C., aiXhrjv on the strength of the reading in his book irepl TUIV 'AdifivTjcnp erai-pibwv avk-qrriv in the codex Rhedigeranus. It (Athen. 586 A). Different views are held is generally considered that the lemma of regarding the intermediate stages through Hesychius refers to the present passage, which the extract reached Harpocration and M. Schmidt consequently wished to and Athenaeus (Schwartz in Pauly-Wisread avKirSiv TCIV ..JwifieXov/iivuv. In sowa I 2863; Schultz, ibid, v n 2415). Ap. Rhod. 4. 1487 aiXlrrjs was restored ' The extract is taken from the speech by Merkel for avXelTT/s {aiXifp-ris four Paris of a messenger, a goat-herd, who anMSS). avXiTTis comes ' from ai;\i} as nounces (to Hector) the approach of the = farm-yard (Horn. A 433, where sheep Greeks (Welcker, p. 114)' (J.). 1 cu8bv6s. For the adverbial use of stand in it: 0 640 ai/\?;s h xbproio-t KVXIVSbpevos /card Kdwpov)' (].). For the form the temporal adj. see my n. on Eur. Hel. see on fr. 92. 651. Copious illustrations are given by 2 fiaXAdv: Babr. 45. 7 TCLIS fiev (wild Blaydes on Ar. Lys. 60 opdpiai.—irpiv KTL The meaning may be either ' so goats) (pipav ifiaXXe OaXXbv <£ CXJ/S, Ant.

TTOIMENEI

153

1201 eu i/eoirdcni'flaXXots.Timaeus p. 136 3 (TT«£)(ovTa irapaXCav ireVpav. The daXkbs -WO.V TO 0dXXov. Kvpluis 5i 0 rijswords may mean, as J. remarks, either iXalas /cXdSos: and his statement is con(1) 'advancing to the rocks by the sea,' or firmed by the evidence of literature, (2) ' moving along' (or ' over ') them where it nearly always means an olive(Aesch. Prom. 734 oTetx* dvypbTOVs yuas, branch. See Ruhnken in loc. for the and seen, on "Eux.Hel. 598). The latter phrase OaXXbv irpoaeteiv to dangle a bait, is preferable, so far as we can judge in like a branch before hungry cattle (H.). the absence of context; but it is difficult For irpoarjiipoiv cf. fr. 171, and for the to decide between Harpocration's irtrpav general sense Plut. poet. aud. 11 p. 30 D and Athenaeus' &icpai>. Cf. fr. 905 wapa7) 5' o t | (<5tci/cet) rov 0aXXbv.—^ipaCpais. KTlav GTCIXUV.. ,b56v (of Theseus). Tucker The loss of a was due to the fact that (C.R. XVIII 245) suggested that irXd/ca is before IT or T it was written as a small loop the true reading, and Wecklein thought attached to them: so Auratus restored
503 irdpavXos 'JLXXrjcnrovTLS, wpaCa Oepovs TW BocTTroptTTj • TjjBe yap #a/Ai£ercu. 5 0 3 . 1 ft/0' C : Ellendt: rtpSe codd.

eW A eiff

2 irdpavXos Bergk: Tr6.poi.KOi AC

5 O 3 Athen. 319 A iri]Xa.iJ.is...iJ.vqixo- the borders," Ai. 892' (J.). Bergk 1 vevci airTwv /cat ~2IOa ffepovs.' 7) Kara TO 0£pos d/C/udfouira. Cf. 1 ?v8' ' probably refers to the coasts S/iauXos fr. 24. Even so the reinforcement of the Troad ' (J.).—TrT|Xap.iis was the of irdpoiKos (' neighbouring' : Ant. 1155) name given to the tunny which had by irdpavXos is hardly satisfactory.— not yet arrived at its full size, or, more upafa.: the 7n/\a/ii55es were distinguished accurately, during the period lasting from from r a wpata, as the tunnies were the time it was six months old until the called at a year old (Athen. 116 E). end of its first year: Arist. h. an. 6. 17. a The wpaiov of Byzantium was esteemed 57 I 15 17 5' a0l-7)(Tis io~TL TCOV 0vvvl5wv Tax^o. ' 6rav yap TEKOHTIV O'L lx0ues iv r y the choicest of delicacies: Archestratus Hovrip, yiyvovrat. e/c rod <pou as KaXov, elairX^ov<7t 5e rov £apos tf5y wpaia means therefore * reaching its ovtxai TT7]Xa//.v5ey. ib. 571*11 doxovtn 8' prime,' and this may also be the meaning iviavrQ etj'at irpt&($()Ttpoi. ruv TnjXaf^tjSuy. of the disputed horaeum scombrum in Plaut. Capt. 851. In the same treatise (8. 13. 598a 26) Aristotle again states that 0vi>i>i8es and TnjXa3 TtjSe: see cr. n. ' If ripSe be kept, /iu5es pass into the Euxine from western render: " since it is frequent for him," waters in the spring and spend the i.e., " for it is his constant visitor." The summer there. These passages will exmiddle voice, which is found only here, plain how the trriXafxvs winters in the = the act. ftiMtfu [O.C. 672)' (J.). For Hellespont. Nauck thinks that Hesythe Sophoclean middle see on fr. 858. chius (111 p. 331) and Photius (p. 428, 12), The gloss of Hesychius (11 p. 299 6a/j.iwho explain that irrfXa^vs should be feraf o^ttXet) is taken, probably with written 5ta TOO I7 (not iryfXaixls), are re- justice, to refer to this passage; but, inferring to this passage. asmuch as 0afj.l^etv nowhere else has the sense of 6/xtXe?i' c. dat., I incline to think 2 irapavXos 'EXXT|O-ITOVTCS, ' lodged that Ellendt was right. The corruption near us in the Hellespont. Cp. O.C. 785 as wdpavXov oitda-rjs, " p l a n t me near was natural with nf Boo-iropiTrj preceding.

IO4>OKAEOY2

5°4 TTXCKTOIS

7rop(f)vpwv Or/pa

yivos.

5O4 TropQvpSip Herwerden: woptpipas codd. |ffrjplj.Tucker: ddpa codd. 8. 20. 6o3 a 7 Ktiprtp ffypeiowi TOI>S ix 5O4 Schol. Ar. Eq. 1150 Kijfids... Plin. n. h. 9. 132 capiunhir autem purirXiy/xa n £K cxoi-viav yiv6/ievov Sfiowv purae parvulis rarisque textu veluti

nassis ("baskets, as it were," cp. Opat iropcpipai Kal ra KoyxiXia elatpirovaiv. pian's raXapots ofiolcu) in alto iactis. iv avTots 5e TO&TOLS 4o- Kijufc meant also the funnel at the top r i of the KaSos or K&SUTKOS (balloting urn): nXiovs £K J\oi[Uvwv KT}[wio'i...yivo$. Cf. Hesych. II p. 475 art/ids" jrXeKTbv d77eioi', A r . Vesp. 754 Kairi<STaii)v evi rots /cij^iois | i/'>)0ifo/i&'uw 6 reXevraws' (J.). See on fr. 295. irop<j>vpo>v was restored by Herwerden for reasons which seem indisputable. Either the plural is required, he says, or projecting inside so as to make the return something like a,\ievni<6i> must have more difficult than the entrance " {Did. occurred in the next line to agree with Ant. 11 546 b, referring to Pollux 1. 47, yivos (Melanges Weil, p. 182). The where it is called Kvxf/iXri). The schol. former alternative is much to be preAr. compares it to a strainer (ijdubs [: so ferred. Cratinus fr. 132, 1 54 K. axoivivos ^0/x6s]), 97]pa: see cr. n. I have accepted Oppian (Hal. 5. 591) describes how iropTucker's emendation, which is a great <)>vpai are caught, in small weels (Kvprides) improvement. He supports it by \a.fif3dmade of rushes: nvprlSes Tjfiaial raXdpois vovai of the schol. and Hesych., and finds yeydaaiv 6/ioiai (600). Herod. 1. 191 the same corruption in Tr. fr. adesp. 484 uses Kvprr), Plat. \Tim. 79 D rep rod Ktiprov (pdeipei (1. B-qpa) ykp ij irpbvma TT]V afiovand elsewhere], Arist. h. an. \lav: see CR. xvm 432. iv 1} Xau-fidvovai rds wop4»jpas. KTi|j.otert irXeKTots. ' The form of K7]fi,6s meant here was like an eel-pot, " narrowing after the entrance, and then widening again, with the rushes or osiers

505 TOVTOIS

yap

ovres SecrTrorat SovXevo/Jbev,

dvdyKr) Kal crLtoTrcovTov KKVCIV. 5O5

Plut. Agis I aWore aXXas <popas their slaves; to these we must, | Though they be silent, hearken.' 2 o-icoirwvTWV KXtieiv is an oxymoron, expressing a particular aspect of the That, he goes on to say, is the experiopposition of 5ea"7r6rat to dovXevoftev: ence of politicians who court the favour cf. Ant. 74 6Vta iravovpyf)(xao'. Dobree of the mob; they find that it is the tail quoted Cic. pro Deiot. 18 fit in dominatu which leads and they who follow. IT. servitus, in servitute dominatus. renders: ' W e are Their masters and

^>ep6/j.€poi, ffiXois Kal irddeaiv iTraKoXouBovvTes, oirep oi 2o0o/cXifous ^or-ijpes ^xi rujf -rroipviuv Xtyovaw ' TO6TOLS...KXI>€U>.'

506 Kal 8r/ rows 5O6. 1 rzLxiwv Dindorf: TVX&V cod. Haun., retxtw cod. Vind., TQIXUV coni. Nauck I Toaeidiovs codd. 2 BpiyKois dwoaeiaatxivr) codd. : corr. Lehrs 5O6 Herodian 7rept p.ov. Xi£. p. 11, 4 6/ioiws 8£ /cat dpaeviKws KT7]TI.KG>S TJoaiSews {irocrelSios cod.) us 'Hpd/cXetos affXos. XO&OKXTJS Uoifiiai' TvxS>"...diroaeiaap.ii'Tj.'

The reading and interpretation are both doubtful; but it would seem that Upoia must be the noun to which dwoaei.aafiivri belongs, and that the impending

nOIMENEI destruction of the city is described. For dir<xrete
avoauaanivri. For errors of this kind see on fr. 941, 10.—In Horn. 446 Poseidon alone is the builder of the wall, h' appriKTOs T6\IS efij; though usually Apollo is mentioned as his colleague, as in Eur. Tro. 5. In the famous passage of Vergil (Aen. 1. 608 ff.) Poseidon is himself the destroyer of his own handiwork : hie. ubi disiectas moles avohaqite saxis \

155

saxa vides mixtoque undantem pulvere fumum, I Neptunus muros magnoque emola tridenti \ fundamenta quatit totamque a sedibus urbem \ emit. Similarly Tryphiod. 680 f. recalls the builder of the walls in speaking of their downfall: Tc(x eff ' W itTokiiropdov eirl ip\6ya. Bwpii£aires, | Zpya, HOO~CL8&WVOS % (rvvtyevov

avTfirj.—Kttl 811 is apparently equivalent to ijSri. So also in the middle of the sentence Hdt. 9. 66 irporepewv Si T^S bdov 6p$ Kal 8rj (petiyovras Toils Il^pcas.

O.C. 173. Kuehner-Gerth 11 125.—For the stem-variation IloinS- IIo
507 d[i(j)rffJi€pov

Kpvjxov 5 O 7 Suid. s.v. a/Atprj/j.epoi> • TOV a.f fieptvov Trvperov. — ocpofcXijs Ilot^ ' p fb p ] f p

29 afupr)ftepiv6s • 6 Kadyfiepinds ' Kal 0 fiepov Ojtiot'ws. Phryn. (Bekk. anecd. p . 24, 31, p . 4 3 , 3 de B.) a.fup'rj/j.epos trvperds. J. writes : ' If the subject to ol larpoi. T h e quotidian is an intermittent Jezw or ague, in which the sufferer, the sense is ' ' bearing about

with him a chill in the jaws." But if the subject was something external to him (e.g. 06^os), tpipav = " bringing, causing " such a chill. These words (like those of fr. =oi) are probably taken from a boastful speech of Cycnus, who imagines his aspect as striking terror into some Greek chief (perhaps Achilles), whose teeth will chatter, as with a feverish ague of fear (Welcker, p. 116).' Kp\i|xov, = ' chill,' as in Eur. fr. 682 fxQv Kpvfxbs avTTJs Tr\evpa yv/j.va£eL X°^7 J

(XoXJ Valck.); (J.)—ap.(J>r|(j.epou. The form is attested also by Etym. M. p. 89,

the paroxysms recur every 24 hours, as contrasted with the tertian (r/)tra?os or SLCLTpiTOs), where the period returns in 48, and the quartan, in 72 hours (Plat. Tim. 86 A). See Encycl. Brit.11 x v n 462. Cf. Shaksp. Hairy V\\. 1. 113 (Mistress Quickly of Falstaff) ' Ah, poor heart ! he is so sliaked of a burning quotidian tertian, that it is most lamentable to behold.' ' Tremors of the muscles, more or less violent, accompany the cold sensations, beginning with the muscles of the lower jaw (chattering of the teeth)' : Encycl. Brit}1 XVII 46 r, art. Malaria.

508 yap e'X/cos ovhev olSd TTOV rvyelv 5O8

oi7T G I

G: xav°" Suid. | fort. 018a

occurs in Suid. s.v. dpr\vtiv eVyScts, except 5 O 8 Schol. Soph. At. 581 (edited by Dind. from cod. G) OVK ianv iarpov aorpov that Sophocles' words are given as \byy The eirydaTs xpy&@al r°v Tpaifxaros ijdrj rou^s yap oi)5e>' £\KOS oidd TTOV xav°vSeo/idvov. Kal iv Woipiai '\by<$ yap (XKOS version of Suidas was understood by Hemsterhuis to mean 'hard words break The same comment ovdev ol ir no bones,' comparing Aesch. Theb. 385

i56

IO0OKAEOYI

oiS' eXicoiroia yiyverai rh atf/tara. But with such an original it is not easy to account for xav6v, which must be an it is obvious that the tradition of cod. G, explanatory adscript. I suggest olda though corrupt, is superior; and that the ai'lLirTvytv (or, as is perhaps preferable, meaning required to enforce the parallel , Papageorgius oT5& irov rvybv there seems to be no reason why Sophocles should not have employed it in that - [ovSev' oTSd TTOV re/j.e'iv Papasense. This conjecture has been partially basileios), F. W. Schmidt OUXOOTOI xav^>vanticipated, as I have since learnt, by Nauck proposed (but subsequently abandoned) oTS' SLKOVS Tvxeiv (or rvxbv), and Tucker (C.R. x v i n 246), who reads iron (or TTW) iTTvxiv, and supports it by the Headlam \byov yctp £\KOS ovdtv larpov medical use of Trriyfia and irrvKTbv as "mxe". It may be that Dindorf s TTW is ' a bandage.' For X6y<jj Gomperz aptly all that is required (see Jebb on Phil. compares Aesch. Theb. 702 Te8t\yji£vav -256), and that the beginning of the next TOI fi' otic &Tra/A[3\vi>eis Xoyi;), where the line, which completed the sense, has been lost (e.g. -e iaa-lfiov uurripoi >: for the different distribution of the emphasis should be observed. infinitive see Goodw. § 915, 2 b). But

509 KVVOS ireWrjs

re

/8oos prjvecov

to avoid the conclusion that pt]viuiv is 5O9 Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 109, corrupt; Sophocles surely did not use the 7 TeWdv' inro^xubv. ayvoovvres 5£ npes Alexandrian p-fjv, a rare poetic word, ypd(pov(Ti irfkiov.. .ws /cat 2O (fr. 114) r)ol generally supposed to be a mistaken formation due to -iro\<jppT)v and ignorance of ' Kvvbs Tr^Wrjs re fifjKaSos (3obs pr/vta)?.' dpriv (see on fr. 655). Still less can it The glossary of Erotian has been entirely belong to Hippocrates or his interpreters. transformed and considerably mutilated It may of course be a corruption of pivbv, in the course of transmission ; and the especially if Schneidewin's restoration of present passage has suffered irreparable fr. 114 is correct: for in that case we damage. Thus Klein rightly points out should have to recognize in Erotian that some words must have been lost a conflation of two separate quotations. before us, since the intention cannot be But I have sometimes thought that to accuse Soph, of ignorance in adopting jrqviiiiv might have come from epp.ijviiuv, the form TTAIOS. If this evidence stood a scholiastic word (schol. El. 505), and alone, we should probably infer that the that the original intention was to quote quotation from the Hot/lives had also from both plays merely enough to prove been lost, but we know 'from another that Sophocles applied the word 7reXX6s source (see on fr. 114) that the words to the colour of a dog, a goat, and an Kvvbs...p7ivtwv do not come from the ox.—ir«\X6s, which comes, I suppose, Amphiaraus. It is generally assumed from *Tre\-vb-s, is akin to ire\tbs, Trethat they represent an iambic trimeter \i5v6s, 7roXi6s, IIAo^, Lat. pullus etc. quoted from the n o t i c e s : thus Duentzer The accent wavers : thus the Macewould emend the first part by writing alybs re ireWijt /J.T]K&5OS, and for the last donian Pella is said to be so called on fiovs avr^y evpe TT^WTJ Etyjn. M. p. two words Brunck read piviv /3o<5s, Lo659, 38 ; but cf. Theocr. 5. 99 rav olv beck fiov T' apaevos, and Schneidewin /Soos I pivbv. Klein tentatively suggested" rdv viWav (TreXXdi/ vulg.). In Arist. h. an. 9. 1. 6o9 b 22 TUIV tpoibi&v S re pivwv (vulg. piviav). I am not satisfied iriWos Kal 6 Xevrfs it may be a noun, as that these corrupt words ever formed Lobeck points out (Paralip. p. 343). As a piece of continuous verse, and cannot to the meaning J. remarks: 'Common in any case accept the ' bleating cow' root-sense, " p a l e " ; then ash-coloured, which L. and S. and others ascribe to livid, black-and-blue, and so darkSophocles. pT)KaSos, with or without coloured.' alyis, must mean a goat. It is impossible

TTOIMENEI

157

510 e/ucry' ocrov Srj irvfkov opyacrai KOXOV. 51O Didymus in Dem. Philipp. 12 (13) [Berl. Klassikertexte I p. 67] 2o0oKXTJS iv [Hoifi]i(nv • ' tfua[y'] b'aov de[i TT]IJ\bv 6pydaai K[O\6]V.' SO restored the passage was rendered by Diels: ' he mixed with it so much water as was needed to prepare a good strain (Ton).' But this would seem to require 6'0-ou, and, as Fuhr (Berl. phil. Woch. 1904, 1128)

dyevvaL

511.

has pointed out, 7n/\6s does not require an epithet, and the rendering of TH;\6S raX6s is questionable. It seems better, therefore, to accept Buecheler's conjecture S-f). It should be added that Cronert (lilt. Mus. LXII 387) deciphers A{ or possibly A]J in the papyrus, with KO.[\6]V at the end of the line.

For irt]XAv op-ydo-cu see on fr. 482.

rr) et TTJV TTJS

1 5rj TTOTC Cobet: d-fiwoye cod.

511 Schol. M Eur. Andr. 276 6 emendation. Even the character of the Mates re KOX ALOS TOKOS ' 6 'Epf/.ijs. fxi/nvij-metre cannot be determined; for, alrat de TTJS laropias iKdvr]S Ivda though it appears to be anapaestic, the TOO jiwjXou rj\dov Kptdrjao/Meyai "Hpa Kal first two lines may consist of an enhoplic Affrjva Kal A0po5i'rj; irapa ry IldptSi. followed by a glyconic as in Ant. ii4of. rmavTo. ( 5' ijdr) arrival of the three goddesses on Mt iroTi p,7)\oTp6ipovs \ ay^Xav T' rj\dev TI\V Ida to submit themselves to the judgement 'Idalav \...TpwMfnnoj> apfia. Or ayevvat. of Paris. The contrast between the may be the remains of d < p > yevvai< s > : majesty of the goddesses and the rustic cf. Eur. LA. 573 ZfioKes, w lid/sis, Tjre seclusion of Paris was especially attraciTp&(pT)s \ ai ye \ flovKoXos dpycvvals tive to Euripides who often recurs to the 'Idaiais napd /iocrxois. Of previous contheme: see. He I. 3 5 7 , ^ ^ . 6 4 4 , / . ^ . 180, jectures we may record those of (1) Her1291 ff. In all these passages, in order mann : "lbrjs ri drj TTOTC fjr.7j\oTp6<pov va^Ty to mark the contrast referred to, Paris Kplveiv ijvTrio-ev ayuiv ' E p ^ s Tpio\vp.inov is called the herdsman: see Tr. fr. adesp. apfia. (2) Wecklein : "Idijs \ ore fiyXoTpS286 us Hpiafiidaiviv {fupepys 6 /3owcd\os, . He supposes that the conditions are too uncertain to admit of

I04>0KAE0YI

158

words were addressed to Priam or Hecuba. (4) For ayevvai T^I Herwerden conjectured dyev "ATJ;, but despaired of « TTJV Trjs"I8r)s.

3 TpioXvpTriov appa is correctly explained by the Hesychian gloss (sup:). To us the metaphor seems forced, for the phrase means nothing more than

' three goddesses coming together'; but it is exactly paralleled by Eur. 's rplvuKov app.a baijibvuiv and is common elsewhere, especially with feifyos: Eur. fr. 357 fevyos rpnrapBevov (the three daughters of Erechtheus), Tro. 924 licpive Tpurabv feuvos oSe Tpiauwv deav, Phoen. 328 O7njva.i ofioirripov (n.). Cf. also fr. 545.

512 TOTTOUS

512

Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 97, 6 <&>-

fivpoi' XocponXrjs Tloifieffiv ' a/tipovs T6irovs ' e7ri0er!/c£s airif ixp^l^aro, u;s 'IIpuiSia><6r. Cf. Hesych. I p . 154 afivpoiTOTTOI ot KaBvypoi, jcai ayav piovres. &TT6 TOU fivpelv (1. fitipetv), where it n o w

appears that the lemma should be changed to d/xvpoi Tifrroi. Lobeck, Path. El. l p. 21, comparing "A/j.vpos as the

name of a river in Thessaly, accepted the derivation from fiipoi. But Wilamowitz thinks that the words refer to the cattle-stalls, ' places that have no scent of perfume': cf. fr. 565, 3. The latter is certainly the meaning in Orac. Sibyll. 5. 129 rr/K KVKII\% ajiupov Kal TT\V fivpLirvovv Tori •

513 Bep eKvvra 513

Hesych. I p. 372

/

fipbpov (pepeKOvra fib/iov c o d . : corr. Musurus)" Qpiyiov ai\6v. 2o<poK\i)s II01-

For the deep note of the Phrygian flute (oboe) see on fr. 450. Cf. Ar. Nub. 313 KOX ixovaa. fiaptippo/xos ai\&v. Eur. Hel. 1350 84£O.T6T' is x^Pas I jSapi?fipo}xov a.v'hbv TepfiQeltr' d\a\ay/x(p. Lucr. 2. 619 raucisonoque minantur cornua cantu, \ et Phrygio stimulat ntimero cava tibia mentis. Hor. C. 3. 19. 19 cur Berecyntias cessant Jiamina

tibiae? Strabo 471 8 Se TOVS aiXoiis BepeKVVTIOVS Ka\(i Kal $pvylovs. Bergk's proposal to read §6IJ.(}OV for flpt>/J.oi>, after Catull. 64. 263 etc., is a doubtful improvement. The Phrygian ai\ol are also mentioned in Eur. Bacch. 128, I.A. 577. —For the form BepeKvrra cf. Aesch. fr. 158 Bep^Kwra x^P0"- The inhabitants of the Berecyntian district, who by the time of Strabo (p. 580) no longer existed as an aggregate bearing that name, were known as Be/j^/cwres or BepeHvvrai..

514 514

Hesych. IV p. 251 ioiviidois

name

Phoenician

becoming

current:

ffi. 2otpoic\TJs Hot/itaLy. ^irel "\aves...ira.pa\afj6vTes SiSaxxi irapa TWV el Ka.Sfi.os avra en uclaun.—The is TT]V 'B\Xa5a, 'foici/c^ia /ce/c\?)
earliest authority for the Phoenician origin of the Greek alphabet is Hdt. 5. 58, who, after describing its introduction by Cadmus, proceeds to account for the

on a Teian inscription <poiviK-/)ia is the name given to the letters inscribed on the stone (IGA 497). Later authorities such as Ephorus (FUG 1 270), Aristotle

TTOIMENEI (fr. 501 R.), Pliny (w. h. 7. 192), and Tacitus (aim. 11. T 4 ) , give similar accounts; for it makes little difference whether Cadmus is described as the actual inventor, or merely the importer of the letters into Greece. The tradition accords with the results of modern investigation (see Macan on Hdt. I.e.);

159

but there were other stories current, ascribing the invention to Hermes, Prometheus, Linus, Palamedes, or Cecrops. It is interesting to find Sophocles again in accord with Herodotus, though the name QOWIKIO. appears to have prevailed apart from the story of Cadmus. Hdt. 5. 59 uses the term RaS^ta ypd[x.[/.aTa..

515 ico 515 yap

Sext. Emp. math. 1. 313 otire

€K T^XV71S

TWOS fjLefjLadrjKatrii' tin ol

irapa. T £ —O$OK\H irol/^ves ' lui paWr/v' \4yovres iu fiaatKeu \£yov
This word, which is said to be Semitic and akin to Baal and Bel, is introduced in order to give an oriental colouring to the dialect of the chorus. So in frs. 517, 520, and in the Troilus (frs. 631, 634) and 'E\4vris ydfios (fr. 183). It was one of the few terms which would be easily recognized: cf. Aesch. Pers. 660 (in the invocation to Darius) fiaWriv apxouos /3aXX?7j> tdi LKOV, where schol. M has ^aWyjva

TOV /3acrt\^a.

'Eticpoplwv 5e Qov-

piojv
• /3act-

Xeus Kara Qovpiovs. The curious statement thus attributed to Euphorion is discredited by Meineke, Anal. Alex. p. 142, who corrects Qovpiuv to Qpvyioiv. Herodian

irepi fxov. Xe|. p. 17,5 and Arcad. p. 9, 1 also support the spelling ^aW^v, so that the weight of authority is strongly against /SaXiJi', which Lobeck (Paral. p. 191 n.) and M. Schmidt on insufficient grounds preferred. The later scholia on Aesch. I.e. have the additional statement 66ev Kal Ba\Tjva!oy opos, S eori.fia.
also appears in Eustath. //. p. 381, 17, Od. p. 1854, 2 6. They appear to have derived it from the account of the river Sagaris given by the impudent forger, who attempted to foist upon Plutarch the treatise de fluviis, and whose frauds have been exposed by Hercher (pseudoPlut. de Jluv. 12. 3, 4): in the same passage is a remark about the BOXXTJC Xi0os, which is equally unworthy of credence, and another about Ballenaeus, the son of Ganymede, who founded a festival in his father's honour.

516 araXwcrcu 516 afpcLvitrai.

Hesych. I p. 177 avahCxrai' TTOLfJ.€veaiv (sc [so the — cod.: cor-

For avaXCxrai = to destroy see on fr.

rected by Soping to SO0OKXT}S

517 517

Antiatt. p. 84, n /3ap«" KUT'

oldas Kal ir\oiov. 2o0o/cX?/5 iv 'Q.oiy.kai fiapifiav (/3api(8dTae, Blomfield on Aesch. Pers. 559) X^yei TOK vairrfv ij rbv r-ijs iSripews e7ri/3£^i)/c6ra. Hesych. I p . 361 (lapvS&viv, fiapiSav rbv vavaifiarriv, ev i\66

Soping conjectured PapifidTrjv, fia.pi{ia.v

in Hesych., without being aware of the Sophoclean instance; M. Schmidt proposed §apL§a.v rj fiaplfiav. L.

Dindorf

suggested thatfiaplfiav\ewv was the phrase in Sophocles, referring to the Greek army setting out for Troy. But it

i6o

IO*OKAEOYI

should be borne in mind that fiapis is usually a foreign boat, Egyptian (Aesch. Suppl. 885) or Persian (Pers. 556); and Lycophr. 747 applies it to the extemporized raft of Odysseus. In a late epigram (A.P. 7. 365) it is used of Charon's boat. We should therefore expect it to denote a Trojan vessel as in Eur. LA. 297, unless indeed the chorus are supposed to be speaking of the Greeks in their own dialect, as in fr. 515. In regard to the formation of

the word itself, Sturtevant (Class. Phil. V 335) considers that the suffix -/3?;s (-/3os) has a contemptuous force, and compares naxo^as' tiri Katiip TJKWV ; ayoftos' &fj 6 dtf pp6 jj p6 y pf

all of which are glosses from Hesychius. Similar are ixovifias, vv/i.(p6fSas (an epithet

of Silenus, for which cf. fr. 314, 149); the contemptuous tone is clearly present, although the derivation from fia.lvu is explicit. See also Lobeck, Phryn. p. 610.

518 5 1 8 Steph. Byz. p . 212, 20 VpaiK6s' 0 "E\Xi)i'...r/3atKes Se Trapa 'AX/r/iaci (fr. 134) at TUJP 'EXXIJPWP /«/r^pes, KO.1 7rapa So^o/cXfi iv Hoi/j.^cnv.

It has been assumed from as early as the third century B.C. down to our own times that the whole race which was afterwards known as Hellenes had previously been called TpaiKol. It ought to be enough to refute this fallacy that we can trace the progress of the name Hellenes, which ex hypothesi is later, from its origin as a tribal appellation until it finally becomes national. For there was no Greek nation in prehistoric times. Yet even Mommsen (Hist. I 140 E. tr.) argues that 'the Italians had become acquainted with the Greek nation before the newer name Hellenes had supplanted the older national designation Graeci.' The earliest authority which can be invoked in support of the theory is Arist. meteor, r. 14. 352** 2, who however only says that the Selli and the people formerly known as TpaiKol but afterwards as Hellenes dwelt in the neighbourhood of Dodona. But the case is different from the third century onwards, when the influence of Greece upon the outside world became of more importance than her national history. So the Parian Marble (FHG I 5 4 2 ) : "EXXijj/es Civoii.iu6t\iia.v rb irp&repov YpaiKol KaXoifyteyoi. Apollod. 1. 50 : Hellen d 0 ' avrov TOUS nakovixtvom TpcuKovs TpoffTjy&pevffev "EXXT/^as. By the

Alexandrian pedants Tpaticds began to be used in place of "EXXi/c : see C.allimachus ap. Strab. 46 (fr. 104) and Etym. M. p. 239, 15 (fr. 160), Lycophr. 532, 891, 1195 etc. But in classical literature Tpainds etc. are essentially local names;

Tpata (B 498) was somewhere in the valley of the Asopus, and Tpairf (Thuc. 2. 23) was the coastland of Boeotia opposite to Eretria. It is significant that the Euboean colonization of Cumae was according to tradition the earliest occasion on which Greek influences were brought into contact with the Italians. Such is the evidence for the use of Tpaixds, and Grote's scepticism (11 p. 270) in relation to the statement of Stephanus is justified. Of course the grammarians were on the look out for any scrap of evidence which would bolster up their theory of the old TpaiKoi, but it is much more likely that ypaiKft both in Alcman and in Sophocles was nothing but a synonym of 7/aoes. For these reasons I have dropped the capital letter. That is the view of Dittenberger in Herm. XLI 100, who points out that the Greeks had no ethnica in -
nOIMENEI—TTOAYZENH

161

519 kwa 5 1 9 According to Hesych. n p. 338, for which see on fr. 56, this word (or 'Idvva?) was used by Sophocles for the

designation of a Greek woman, was probably meant.

Helen

520 TrapaadyyaL 5 2 O Claudius Casilo irapa TOIS ATTIcorrected by Papageorgius to irapaaayyy • KOTS fr/jTopcTi $7]To(iiJ.eva (Miller, Milanges yyp de lit. gr. p . 397) = Lex. rhet. post It is not likely that Soph, and Eur.

Phot. p. 674, 27 tra77ct>'5
made the blunder of confusing impa
8t ol airovTeX-

2O0OK\?)S Se iv

JIOL-

fi4
is a t t e s t e d

by Hesych.

Ill

p. 276 Trapaaayyi\6y<{}' ol Hdpcrai roi)s 5 ^ X X a s ovrto \4yov
521 \JJO 521 Herodian irepl JXOV. Xe|. p . 46, 18 irapa 2o0OK\ec if Hmfie8€yfia irapa So0ox\et.

No monosyllabic adverb ends in -0, but >|/o as iiri
Eustath. //. p. 855, 29 (Ael. Dion. fr. 337 Schw.) gives T6 ipb iroL^eviKbv in a list of similar exclamations. But ^6 in Phot.

lex. p. 655, 12 is our lpshaw I ' (iirl TOU aairpov Kal fj.7] cvvapiaicovTos), and should

not have been confused with the shepherd's call by L. and S. ' Etiam hodie exclamatio est pso ! aut so !' Blaydes. Cf. if> in fr. 314, 170.

TTOAYZENH

The sacrifice of Polyxena in response to the demand of the spirit of Achilles is well known from the Hecuba of Euriprdes ; and it is certain that the Polyxena of Sophocles covered the same ground as the first part of that play. So schol. Eur. Hec, p. 11.

11

162

I00KAE0Y2:

I TO, irepl Yloh.v%evr)v ecrriv evpeiv irapa 2o^>o/cX.£t iv

The incident was recorded in the Iliupersis, according to the epitome of Proclus (EGF p. 50) : e-rrecra efju-rrptfa-avTes rrjv iroXiv JJ6Xv^evr]v
be that it was also contained in the Nosti; for Proclus, in abstracting that poem, after mentioning the quarrel of Agamemnon and Menelaus (see on fr. 522), and the departure of certain chieftains with Menelaus, states that, when Agamemnon was about to sail (EGF p. 53), 'A^iWew? e'iStoXov eTTHpavev ireipaTat Bia/ccoXveiv irpoXeyov ra avfi^'qao^eva. In Euripides the

ghost so appearing required the sacrifice of Polyxena (Hec. 37, 95); but Proclus merely states that his object was to warn the Greeks of the disasters that would attend their voyage, and to dissuade them from starting. If, then, we are to assume that the narrative of the Nosti did not overlap that of the Iliupersis, it was a later poet who connected the appearance of the ghost with Polyxena's death. According to schol. Eur. Hec. 41, Ibycus (fr. 36) related that Polyxena was slain by Neoptolemus; and Longinus (de subl. 15. 7) couples Simonides (fr. 209)2 with Sophocles for the excellence of their description of the ghostly vision: Kara rov d-jroirXovv rwv 'EWrfvwv (sc. a/cpas 6 2o<£o/e\»)9 •7redvTaaivofjiivov TOLS avayofievoK virep rov rdqbov, fjv OVK olB' el Tt? oijnv ivapyecTepov elBcoXoirolrjae

%ifia>vihov. In Quint. 14. 178 Achilles appeared to Neoptolemus in a dream, and asked for Polyxena as his share of the booty. F. Noack (Iliupersis, p. 11 ff.) conjectured that Sophocles was the first to bring the appearance of the ghost into causal relation with the sacrifice, and that Euripides attacked his version3. But the gaps in the evidence are too wide to permit us to entertain such speculations. Welcker justly considers that the play opened with the strife between the Atridae, and that, when Menelaus departed, Agamemnon resolved to remain behind in order to propitiate Athena by sacrifice (fr. 522). He attributes fr. 887 to the parodos of the chorus, who, if the conjecture is correct, must have consisted rather of Greek soldiers than of Trojan captive women. The scene of the play was on the Trojan coast, probably in the neighbourhood of Sigeum, where Achilles was said to have been buried4. Welcker acutely remarks that the grave 1

See Wilamowitz, Einleitung, p. 14639. The only instance in which Simonides is known to have influenced tragedy, according to Wilamowitz, Sappho u. Simonides, p. I542. 8 See Escher in Pauly-Wissowa I 241. 4 For the tradition see Gruppe, p. 6911. In Horn, w 82 the tomb is d/cri; ttn Trpovxotitry, iwl wXarei "E\\t)air6v7i0, but it has often been pointed out that to Homer ' Hellespont' included the open sea to the west of th& Troad. 2

nOAYHENH

163

cannot have been represented on the stage, since the undeviating usage of tragedy required that the sacrifice of Polyxena should be reported by a messenger and not enacted before the eyes of the spectators. Hence he inferred that the ghost must have come from the grave to the tent of Agamemnon. On the other hand we have no right to disregard the evidence of Longinus, who distinctly speaks of the phantom as appearing above the tomb. In the present state of our knowledge, there does not seem to be any way of escape from this dilemma: for the identity of tomb and altar see on Eur. Hel. 547, Holzinger on Lycophr. 313, and the evidence since collected by Ridgeway, Origin of Tragedy, p. 137 ff. However this may be, the ghost certainly appeared upon the stage (fr. 523); and that it was Agamemnon to whom his message was delivered is made additionally probable by fr. 526, which seems to foretell the murder by Clytaemnestra. Clearly Agamemnon is also the speaker of fr. 524; but whether that is part of an answer to the phantom intended to excuse the neglect of which he had complained, or comes from a judgement delivered after hearing the conflicting claims of Hecuba and Neoptolemus—both of whom were probably characters in the play—can hardly be determined. Arist. poet. 23. I459b 7 gives a list of 'more than eight'— there are actually ten—tragedies which are taken from the Little Iliad, and among them is an otherwise unrecorded a-iroirXov*;. Welcker (p. 179) suggested that this was an alternative title of the Polyxena of Sophocles ; and Ribbeck1 agreed on the strength of Longinus' words which have been quoted above. The reference of this and other titles to the Little Iliad rather than to the Iliupersis has given much difficulty ; and it is generally supposed that the concluding part of the Little Iliad was also known as Iliupersis*. There is nothing to indicate that Sophocles made any use of the love-motive which some of the authorities have introduced into the story of Achilles and Polyxena3. It is, therefore, unnecessary to discuss the question whether it is ancient, or, as others prefer to suppose, the invention of late romancers4. 1 2 3

Rom. Trag. p. 417. Allen in C.Q. 11 84 thinks that the mistake was due to Aristotle. Collected by Escher in Pauly-Wissowa I 238, and Grappe, p. 694,, who also give references to recent discussions. 4 So Allen in J.P. xxxi 218. On the other hand Turk in Roscher m 2719 argues from the archaeological evidencerthat even in the Cypna Achilles was represented as enamoured of Polyxena, and that the idea was subsequently developed.

II—2

I04>0KAE0YZ

164

522 cru 8'

CLVOL

' 522.

/Jiifivcov TTOV KCLT 'iSaicu' \66va crvvayaywv 0vr)7r6\ei.

1 ffov Cdh I avre coni. Nauck | TTOU Xylander: rty vel TOV codd.

522 Strabo 470 6 5' ovv 2O<J>OK\TJS s.v.): cf. 7 155—of this very incident— ri/iio-ees 8' a pa Xool eprqTioVTO fUvovres \ •n-orftras TOV M.evi\aov ex rijs T/30/as avffi trap' 'ArpetSji 'Aya/iifa>ovi voiiukvi airatpeiv ffweiSovra ev TTJ TLo\vl-e[vri, rbv 8' 'Aya.fi4fJ.vova fJLiKpbv vTroKeKpSrjvai. fiovKtt- Xawc. (2) It has been thought that TIJ» fievov TOV e£i\d<7a.
In relating the strife between Agamemnon and Menelaus, Sophocles seems to have followed the account in Horn. 7 136 ff., which agreed with that of the

(adopted by Nauck). But irov gives a good sense here and is confused with roG also at Ai. 546, Trach. 908. Wecklein supported TOV, agreeing with 'OXi)/i-

Nosti: 'A6r/va 'Ayafiifivova KOX MeWXaop eh ipiv Ka6larri<Ti. Tepl TOV (KTT\OV. 'Aya/li/iviai' ptv ovv TOV TTJS 'A8r)vas i^iXacrbov fx€vos x^ c7rtjLi^pet [EGJ^p. 53).

TTOV.

1 This line has been attacked on two grounds: (1) because the Homeric a58i does not occur elsewhere in tragedy. But it is not easy to emend, for Nauck's afire, though Aeschylean, is only used by Soph, at Track. 1009, and nowhere by Eur.; and this is just the place where we might expect an echo of the Homeric affli /liveir (A 492, St' 674, e 208 and many other examples quoted by Ebeling

2 The Mysian Olympus is in fact a considerable distance from Ida, although Strabo calls it o/iopoi {I.e.). He adds, as if to account for the confusion by which Soph, speaks of Ida and Olympus as forming the same range, that four peaks of Ida towards Antandros are called Olympi. Jebb on Ai. 720 interprets M.U
523 airaiwvds re KOX j rfkdov, apcrevas Xiirovcra 6^vir\rjya<s ydovs, 5 2 3 . 1 dKTas Jacobs : u T&S F P | OTT' aiwvas F P : corr. Canter | jueXa^j3a0eis P 2 rfKdov apaevas xoas n u c transposuit Heyne: post 760ns (v. 3) habent FP 3 r/xoia-as Grotius: ifooOffa FP 5 2 3 Apollodorus (/7/G1429) quoted by Porphyrius ap. Stob. Eel. I 49. 50

Aristarchus, whose life extended probably from about 180 B.C.—no B.C., and was p . 419, 1 W . 'Ax^ptav 5e Kai 'Axepovata spent at Athens, Alexandria, and PerXt/ivti Tairhv, as KOX 2O<J>OK\TJS b> IIoXu^xj; gamus, was one of the most celebrated 1 TT\V 'A^iXX^ws if/vxv ' elffdyet \iyovo~av • critics of antiquity. The treatise irepl ' dKTas...x»ds,' TasrQv Beiov, which may be regarded as a history 0I (ras veKpCov \eyuiv iraiwv' OVK ^ ^ > o.po~evas of Greek religion, was a work—to quote s Tas Se x°^ ouSev eKTpe<])o{i
nOAYEENH

165

by Apollodorus: ras irtuwv' oiiK £x°6os, as applied to them (see Tucker said of Apollo (Aesch. Ag. 1059), ov yap on Aesch. Cho. 6: cf. Aesch. fr. 168 (3io5iipois). J. on the TOLOVTOS WCTTC 8p7JV7}TOU TD-xetv. Cf. E u'Ivdxov...iraurlv r. / . T. 182 rav iv dprjvois ^ovtrav | V^KVCTL other hand renders ' deep-sounding^ comparing Phil. I455 Kal KTtJTTOS apGf)V ueXofiivav, rav ev fioXirous | "AiSas d/u/ci dixa -waidvuv. Hence, by oxymoron, TOVTOV rpopoXrji, ' deep sound of the seafuneral lamentations are described as lashed cape,' Ar. Thesm. 124 (dBapiv) ' paeans that are the portion of the dead': dp(revL (3oa 56KL/XOP, Pers. 6.4 atque marevi see Eur. Hel. \11 traiava? viKvai fiekofiA- strepitum fidis intendisse Lalinae. But vovs (n.), Suppl. 976 doiSai 0' as xP"aeTs, for ciations, Sophocles would not have which see on Eur. Hel. 518, is quite unventured to connect the word with necessary : the fact that P (see cr. n.) Acheron in what must be taken to has p.e\afj.[ia€is is of no significance. be its literal sense (' outpourings'): cf. irpoxoal. 2 \i.iroiicra: the fern, is unusual as compared with Eur. ffee. 1, Aesch. Pers. 3 6£vir\T)Yas rjxouo-as 700115: (1) J. 686, Horn. X 90, Bacchyl. 5. 78 (H.). translated ' re-echoing the shrill strains There is no apparent reason for the of lamentation,' interpreting 6^vir\ijyai abnormal gender, which however the ' striking a shrill note, striking shrilly on context may have explained.—Xi|iVT)s. the ear.' He compared d^vrovojv y6ojv Acheron is imagined sometimes as a in El. 244. (2) I prefer to understand river, sometimes as a lake (El. 138 e| ' wailing that accompanies fierce blows,' 'MSa. TrayKoivov Xi'/was), and sometimes i.e. the cries of the mourners as they as both: thus Plato (Phaed. 113 A) debeat their breasts and heads. Cf. Aesch. scribes the river Acheron as flowing into Cho. 23 6^&xelPi vbv KTtliru), and see on the Xi/xvT) ' Axepovaids.—After this word Eur. Hel. 372. The words are thus there seems to have been a disturbance a concise summary of Ai. 630 f. ofyrbvom of the tradition: see cr. n. Heyne is ixkv y6<3ts I 6pT]v^jo'et., xepoir\a«rot 5' ev followed by Wachsmuth and Nauck. *s followed by pwp (povov, with Jebb's notes.—•yoo'uS : J. Brunck: similarly Dindorf, except that was inclined to distinguish this as a coghe prints rixoias as equivalent to ras cusative of Result (Synt. I 376, 382). The oubkv e/crpe^oiSffas. drfXea jikv yd.p TO. determining consideration is whether or Kapirotfrdpa., dpcreva dk r d ay ova £\eyov r y not the nomen actionis has acquired such TOV jjiv T6 (riripfia irapix^" l^ovov, TT\V ii concrete force, as to be regarded as someKOL inTpe(peu> • tiffev nal ' Brjkvs iipar)' thing external to the agent. (Horn, e 467) i] Tohtiyovos KOL rpotpifirj. Ribbeck (Rom. Trag. p. 417) compared So far as I can discover, there appears to with this passage Trag. fr. incert. x x x v i n be no other evidence for this meaning

166

IOOKAEOYS

73 adsum atque advenio Acherunte vix via alia atque ardua, \ per speluncas saxis structas asperis pendentibus \ maxumis, ubi rigida constat crassa caligo inferum, and conjectured that the lines belonged to the Troades of Accius, who had drawn upon the Polyxena of Soph, for his material.

H. renders: From those unanthem'd and abysmal shores I come, the birthless floods of Acheron, Still echoing to the sound of rending groans.

524 ov yap r t s av hvvaLTO TTpq)paTr)<; o-Tparov rots Traaiv el^cu /cai Trpoo-apicio~ai ^apiv iirel ovh' 6 KpeCo-o~a)v Zeus ifjuov Tvpavvihi OVT i£eTTO(jL/3p£)v OVT' eVau^nAT^cras <£iA.os' < S' > av iX8o)v es SLKTJV Koycov 6<J)\OL. 524. 2 Tta.aiv el%ai Wecklein: Tain Sei£ai codd. 4 e^eirofi.^pS>v Grotius : ef i7r6/j.^pav SA (-&> primitus A), H-ejrdfippuv M, ?
treated as in command of the vessel, although he was actually subject to the orders of the Kvfjepvfirys, while superior to the «:eXeu(rn)s and the crew. Cf. fr. 142 col. ii 5, Moschion ap. Athen. 209 A. See an instructive note by Neil on Ar. Eq. 543, who points out that in Aesch. Eum.

O.C. 570 we should read &xre ^px aiSeioScu Bd-

peiv Trach. 713, frs. 145, 857. The point is well illustrated by Cobet, Coll. Crit. p. 189, who, after giving a long list of ](5, 768 TrpvixvfiTfis is poetic for Kvpepv-qTris. Sophoclean compounds with ex, remarks For the metaphor cf. Demetr. he eloc. 78 that they differ in no respect from the simple verbs, 'nisi quod simplices formae ioimv dXXijXois ffrparriyos, Kv^epvi)Ti]s, toti populo sunt in ore, compositae Diis ijvloxos' irdvT€S yap OVTOL apxovrts eio~t.v. et heroibus sunt propriae.' Dindorf do"0a\(4js ovv epelKal 0 rbv ffTpaTrjybv Kvfieppoints out that c^eiro/i^pwv is used by vqTf)v \4yij3v Trjs irbXews. Tzetzes, Chil. 3. 59. For the sense 2 irpo
ened sense—' grant a rich boon.' So X&P"1 inrovpyetv Aesch. Prom. 662, dvdvvovpyrjaat Soph. fr. 339, xdptra ffvvetciroveiv Eur. Hel. 1378. Wecklein's emendation is no doubt right, for 5eiKvivat. xd-P'" is unknown to tragedy.—For the general sense cf. At. 1350 T6V rot. ripavvov eicefieiv oi pyliov. 3 tirtl ow8\ The synizesis occurs in Phil. 446 (J.'s n.), 948, O.C. 1436, and elsewhere. For the freer practice of comedy and Herondas see Starkie on Ar. Vesp. 827. I have long thought that in

affTolviv 5' o&irco •jrao'tv adeiv SvvafiaL' J oidfo ffav/xcuTrdv, TloXvTraldy ovSi yap 6 ZeiJs otf#' voiv TravTefftT1 avSdvei oiir'

avix^v- iTO/ippla is regularly contrasted with avx/J.bs: see Blaydes on Ar. Ran. 1120. 5 is 8£KI)V X6Y
The editors have

too hastily accepted Dobree's is \6yor Slicqv. The phrase 4s X^ov (more commonly \6yovs) i\6iiv rici means ' to have an interview, conference with another ' : thus, e.g. in A r . Eq. 806 Kai
4s X67OJ> t\Or/ (' have a good talk with,' Neil). There is a copious collection of examples in Blaydes's n. on Nub. 470.

nOAYZENH 7TCU5 OTJT' eywy

A i o s yevoifjirjv

av

167

OVTJTOS 4K dvrjTrjs

re

us

ev povelv cro^xareyaos;

6 £71117' av BvyTos iK O. Hense: ^701 6VT]T6% 7' av ix SM, iyio 6VTJT6S 7' wv 4K A, fyw7' av $vtyrbs uv Meineke 7 ev
(Wyse). So in O.T. 552, 570, 600, 626, Ant. 755, frs. 108, 836. It is difficult to see how, either in this sense or as ' to have good will,' it can be used to limit atxpibrepos. Herwerden, thinking the phrase meaningless, suspected that eS (fipovew had taken the place of a<j>8lrov, but subsequently was content to pronounce the line corrupt. Blaydes, reading TT<3S BiJTci Svifbi T' wx iyih in v. 6, substituted av (pponelv for ev (fipoveiv. Wecklein sug\byuv SLKTI is the same as X67WJ> 117161' gested 7rpo0^/>re/)os for crcxpcbTepos. (Eur. Phoen. 588 n., Hclid. 116 n., Perhaps the inf. is an error for eS Thuc. 3. 67); \byuv afuWa is a Sophistic ippovHv (fr. 462 n.): ' H o w should I... display (Gorg. I.e., Wilamowitz on Eur. while of sound mind, aspire to be wiser Her. 1255). UKT) in the forensic sense is than Zeus ?' A moderate ambition is familiar to Sophocles (At. 447, Ant. 742): the counterpart of a sound intelligence. cf. es SiKTif %aTT\v Eur. I.T. 961. On Cf. Pind. Isth. 4. 14 /«) /idrcve Zeus 7«'e'this view 8<J>\OL is absolute: see Lexx. ptalv ^ V || dovfiev (Xvai. S 6 9VT|TOS (K Bviyrfjs Te <}>«s: cf. El. coTepoi (pride upsets the balance). 589,^27.384, O.T. 1397. Contrast fr. 592 (n.). 7 ev (f)pov€iv was current Attic for ' to be in one's right mind' : Isae. 7. 1

525 air al6ipo
Schol. Ap. Rhod. 2. 1121 vbxW

i n \vyai-qv] T'qv SKOTtivty, wapa T6 Xiiyos TO vrbv. Kal yap 4KUI/O fie\av. teal rbv iviavrbv \vnaflavTa, olov \vyaf3avra, gird fiaivei. X \ i H ^ i

526 ar <x7reipos

KCLKOIV

Translate: ' A tunic that gives no 5 2 6 Etym. M. p. 120, 48 aireipos... e^ei di *Slpos (see fr. 69) Sn a-qixaivei passage, a fatal swathing (awaits) thee.' trwva bU^obov /XT? i-xovTa, uis wapa cr* was governed by some such word as fj.4vei occurring in the context, and the Philopon. in At. pAys. 3. 4, p. 390,20 line is a prophecy of Agamemnon's death, Vit. TOT KVKXOV awetpov (pafiiv TU ny ^Xe'" spoken perhaps, as Welcker thought, by Tripara, /cat txlT^va aireipov' tpaai TOV fi^ the ghost of Achilles. ix0VTa Siatpe
168

IOOKAEOYI

Blaydes unwarrantably proposes of Aesch. Ag. 1381 f. &irapoi> &.fi.V, where Clytaemnestra is not otherwise known, but is nearly related (as e.g. o-wnjpios to truirrip) to herself describes the bathing-robe in 4vSvT-fip, which occurs only in Track. 674. •which she ensnared her husband. Cf. -Eum. 637 (pdpos T^pea'K'rjvojffep, ev 5' It expresses therefore (see Jebb's note in /or.) something which was worn as an •&Ttpf/.ovL I KOTTTCL iredrjirao'' avdpa 5
527 Trapappv/xa TTOS6<S

527 527

Trapa.pv/i.a Hesych., irapi.pvij.iia. Phot.

can be made. Campbell thinks that he meant to describe an ornamental Kpef/.afJLevw TLV&V v<pa(T/j.&Tb}v etc rov aphammer-cloth, which would give a satisiiidTOS (et/iaros or pafifxaros was conjectured factory meaning, although the words by Toll) irpbs KaWos. TLV£S d£ trxotvlov £v hardly seem apt; but he subsequently rots vavaiv • ol di iiriSrifia. Phot. lex. makes the impossible suggestion that p. 389, I irapd.pvfj.fia. 7ro56s * ra viroorj^araTrapdppvfi.a = apfSv\ai of Eur. Hipp. 1189, T& pvhfJ.eva rois ir6das. i.e. foot-holes to prevent from slipping. The sense of Tra.pappifj.aTa, in Xen.Ellendt maintained that, whoever put the Hell. 1.6. 19 is well established, as being three interpretations together, could not curtains of skins or felt hung along the side have read the text of Sophocles; but the ultimate source, one would think, must of a ship to protect those using the decks or gangways. So irapappv
Hesych. m p. 276 irapapifia. I I O X U ^ C J ; ' Trapdpv/Jia. iro86s,'

uis

528 [01 \vfiaiv6fx.evoL

TUTIP

nepiKonTovcn ra

5 2 8 H a r p o c r . p .9 2 ,2 3 r j K p p the mutilation of Deiphobus, although fiivoi...avrl TOO \e\v/j.a(Tfj4i>oi' ol yap there is no earlier extant authority for \vfj.aiv6fi€yoi riuiv eitti&affL weptKbirTuv that incident than Verg. Am. 6. 494 ff. airruiv TO. &Kpa, us nal 2oOK\9js IIoXi/^ci;. For mutilation in general see on fr. 623. It is possible that these words refer to

TTOAYIENH— TTPIAMOI

169

TTPIAMOI The subject of the play is unknown, and Welcker (p. 159) took the view that the citations of the title were errors arising from the appearance of Priam as a character in some one or other of the Trojan plays. For examples of this kind of mistake see Introduction, § 1. Here, however, there is a prima facie case in favour of the title ; and there is no reason why Sophocles should not have composed a Priam, as Philocles did (Suid.). One might guess that the plot related either (1) to the visit of Priam to Achilles in order to ransom the body of Hector, described in Horn. 12 and dramatized by Aeschylus in his <£>pvye<; •^"EKTOJOO? \vTpa {TGF p. 84), or (2) to the slaughter of Priam by Neoptolemus at the altar of Zev? 'Ep«ew?, an incident of the sack of Troy contained in the 'Du'ou Trepo-t? of Arctinus, if not also in the Little Iliad: see the authorities quoted by Frazer, Pausanias, V p. 371, and Gruppe, p. 688. The former view was adopted by Ahrens,1who thought that Ilpia/J.o<; was an alternative title of the Phryges . 529 -yXapCSes 5 2 9 Poll. 7. 118 Kai XarvTrovs Se SO0OKXT7J, OTTOV Kal ipyaXeta TWV Xariinjiv ovofjui^eL Xeias Kal yXapidas. Poll. 10. 147 oUodofjiov CTKEIJT] Xetcu, yXapides, cl>s 2o0o/c\7Js ei> Hpia/Mp. No explanation of the form -yXaptScs is forthcoming; and H . proposed to substitute y\atj>iSes, holding that yXapides was a false reading which deceived the later writers. For yXapis is also attested by Etym. M.\>. 233, 5 yXapis- XI6O^OI'K6V tpyaXetov. KaXXt/ia^os (fr. 159)' ' Kal yXapides aratfujXni re Kadie/iivr) re fioXv/35is.' He points out that yXa
ypa
530 \a.Tviroi 5 3 O Pollux 7. 118: see on fr. 529. The ordinary word for a stone-cutter was rather Xar6/ios, as is indicated by Xarofiia. 1

Another was XtdoKoiros (Dem. 47. 65). Xariiiros is used by Philippus of Thessalonica (A.P. 7. 554).

See Introductory Note below.

IOOKAEOYI

170

531 Xeiat 5 3 1 Pollux 7. 118 and 10. 147 : see on fr. 529. There appears to be no other evidence fixing the meaning of this word, for Etym. Gud. p. 364. 36 \eiav,

in TOO \ealvai rb 6/j.ahtfa, probably refers to Xela 656s. Distinguish Xciai used for the weights of a loom.

532 532

Schol. Ar. Vesp. 9

mony of the grammarians: Hesych. IV p. 302 xVTP'Lfclv' ^" X^TPf Ti$ivai, schol. Ar. Ran. 1190, Hesych. n p. 13 Weil's brilliant emendation for airoKreivai) iyxvTpifeiV inTidivtu f3pi<pos iv x"7/"}lf (Xeyev iv Ilpid/xijj Kal AiffxtiXos From schol. Plat. Min. 315 C ( = Suid., j (fr. 122) KOX QpepeKpaTys (fr. 247, I Etym. M. s.v.) we get the information 208 K . ) . that iyxvTpiffTpiat. was the name given to the nurses who carried out the task of The custom of exposing children in exposure. As we see from Herodotus earthenware pots may be illustrated by that it was customary to use the same Ar. Ran. 1190 6Ve 5?) irpurov /j.iv airbv kind of pot for burying a dead child as d (sc. Oedipus) | xf'Mwi'os OVTOS iv da-rpaKip | iva pi) 'tcrpafais for exposing it, this may explain an yivoiro TOO irarpos (poveiis, Thesm. 505 TO obscure statement in the last-mentioned 5' elaitpepe ypavs ivx^Tpa TO waiSLov, Hdt. authorities : IXcyoi' Sk KOX TO fi\a\j/ai Kara1. 113 iitjKe is rd 4770s, iv T £ l
TTPOKPII The famous story of the loves of Cephalus and Procris is told with many variations; and the elaborate and romantic version contained in Ovid Met. 7. 690—862, is a conglomerate combining the legends of the Teumesian fox, of the love of Aurora for Cephalus, of the hound which could outrun any fourfooted beast, and of the spear which never missed its aim, with the simplest form of the original love-story. A similar remark applies to the accounts given by Apollod. 3. 197 f., Anton. Lib. 41, and Hygin. fab. 189. The visit of Procris to Minos in Crete, and the coarseness of the device by which she revenged herself upon Cephalus, are hardly likely to have been introduced by Sophocles into his play. The original form of the Attic myth is probably to be found in Pherecydes (FUG I 90), as recorded by the schol. on Horn. X 321 : see also Eustath. Od. p. 1688, 20. Cephalus,-the son of Deioneus, married Procris, the daughter of Erechtheus, and dwelt in Thoricus. Wishing

nPIAMOZ—TTPOKPII

171

to test his wife's fidelity, he remained abroad for a period of eight years, and at length returned to his own house in disguise. Then, by a profusion of rich gifts, he set himself to seduce Procris ; and, when at last he seemed to be on the point of success, he revealed his identity and rebuked his wife. A reconciliation followed; but the unremitting ardour with which Cephalus devoted himself to the chase, aroused the suspicion of Procris that he was secretly courting another woman. Her suspicion was confirmed by a conversation with a servant, who admitted that in a lonely spot on the mountain he had frequently heard his master exclaim: to vefyeKrj, nrapayevov. Procris determined to conceal herself at the place indicated, and to await the issue. So, when she heard him repeating the cry, she ran towards him ; but Cephalus, amazed at her sudden appearance, before he could recognize who she was, threw his javelin and killed her. Subsequently he sent for her father Erechtheus and gave her a splendid burial. The conclusion of the story agrees with a vase-painting reproduced by Rapp in Roscher II 1101 from Millingen, Ancient unedited Monuments, fig. 14, which represents Procris transfixed by a spear, Cephalus on one side holding a hound by a leash, and Erechtheus arriving on the other. Although there is no evidence respecting the contents of Sophocles' play, it seems fairly certain that the accidental death of Procris must have been the climax of the action : TO 8' e? TTJV Ylpoicpiv, says Pausanias (10. 29. 6), Kal oi iravTes d8ovcnv...bv rpbirov eTeXevrrjcrev virb rov dvBpo<;.

It should be added that the trial of Cephalus for homicide before the court of the Areopagus was a familiar Athenian legend (schol. Eur. Or. 1649); and it might be argued that Sophocles was hardly likely to have omitted to refer to it. In that case the sole fragment that has been preserved was possibly taken from a description of the judges. 533 X

K(X.KCQl>

5 3 3 Pollux 9. 140 TIX /lev CKK-qpa TO, fiapvs it may be said that the word is Se fiaWov irp&s erepo 7r\ijy rod eiriTifL-qTov, neutral (' valuer,' ' appraiser ' ) ; but there $ KtxpriTa.). 2o(poK\rjs eliruv iv rfj Hp6npt6i is no doubt that, like ("WIT'IIUOU (Jebb on ' Ko\aa-Tal...KaKwi/.' El. 91 j) and iriTi/xw, it had a sinister €iriTi|XT)TTJs is joined with KoXao-rijs tone, to which /3apus points. Strictly an also in E u r . Suppl. 255 TOVTOIV Ko\a<JTT)v assessor of penalties, in the metaphorical Kain.Ti.\xT\Tr)v, £ca£, where TOVTWV is neuter, sense it is perhaps best represented by as no doubt KO.KS>V is here. In Aesch. ' censurer.' Prom. 77 ws ov-mTLixrirfis ye TCJV tpyuv

172

IOOKAEOYZ PIZOTOMOI

The statement of Macrobius (fr. 534) shows that the play dealt with the magic practices of Medea, and, in view of the events covered by the other plays relating to the fortunes of Jason and Medea (KoX^tSe?, %Kvdai), Welcker's inference1 that the plot comprised the cunning artifice by which Medea persuaded the daughters of Pelias to destroy their father's life has been generally accepted. The title clearly indicates the gathering of medicinal or magical herbs ; for pi£oTo/j,o<; was applied as well to those whom we should call sorcerers as to the legitimate followers of Asclepius. Cf. Theophr. h.p. 4. 5. 1 T« <pap[iaicu>&T) rals pi^ai? Kal Tot? o7rot
ot<

TO pitpTo^ovfuva,

tb. 9.

pt&TOfLoi KOL 01 TOL"> ipap/MLicaiBeK OTTOI)? avWeyovTe1;,

tb.

9- 8. I irepl travraiv (f>ap/j,atcco8d>v olov xapirov ^vkitrfiov v\\(ov pi^ciop 7roas' KaXovcri, yap Kal iroav epia TWV (frapfiatccoSdov 01 pi£°~

rofioL (It was a very improbable guess of M. Schmidt that the gloss of Hesych. II p. 549 Kv/c\d[xivo<;' iroa ri<; virb rotv pi^ordficov referred to the play of Sophocles.) Phot. lex. p. 488, 19 pi^oTo/jboi,' fyapfiaiceh- fioraviicoL Lucian dial. d. 13. 1 (Heracles to Asclepius) av Be pt^oTo/io? el Kal d? eXdot Mrj8eia TW HeXia. KaKov) are enough to prove that it was not invented by the tragic poets3. The rejuvenation of Aeson was mentioned in the Cyclic Nosti {EGF p. 55), and that of Jason himself by Pherecydes (FHG I 89) and Simonides (fr. 204)4. During the absence of the Argonauts Pelias had put Jason's father Aeson to death, or had forced him to commit suicide by drinking bull's blood. Whereupon his wife Amphinome had hanged herself in grief, or, according to another version, had 1

2 p. 340 ff. See n. on fr. 534. 3 Gruppe, p. 5784. Shakespeare's allusion (M. V. V 1. 12 In such a night \ Medea gathered the enchanted herbs \ That did renew old Aeson) was doubtless taken from Golding's translation of the Metamorphoses. 1

PIZOTOMOI

173

fled to the royal hearth and there stabbed herself, cursing Pelias as the author of her sorrows. Even Promachus, Jason's younger brother, who was still a child, had been slain, in order that no possible successor to the throne might be left. When the Argonauts reached Thessaly on their return, Medea determined to avenge her husband's wrongs. Accordingly, disguising herself as an aged priestess of Artemis, she managed to effect an entrance into the palace. She then announced to the king that the goddess regarded him with special favour, and had come in person to give him renewed youth. By various magical tricks, and in particular by secretly removing her disguise, and showing herself as a young and beautiful .woman, she won the confidence of Pelias and his daughters. The latter were ready to do anything she bade them, and when, after cutting up and boiling an old ram, she pretended to produce in its place a lamb from the cauldron, she had no difficulty in persuading them all—with the exception of Alcestis—to take the same course with their father. While Pelias was thus being done to death, Medea lighted a torch on the roof of the palace as a signal to the Argonauts, who were waiting in concealment outside. Then Jason, with the help of his companions, seized the royal stronghold. Eventually, however, he surrendered the throne to Acastus, the son of Pelias, and withdrew to Corinth. This narrative is principally taken from Diod. 4. 50—53, which should be compared with the accounts given in Apollod. 1. 143 f., Hygin. fab. 24, Pausan. 8. n . 2, and Ov. Met. 7. 297—349. Thus Ovid and Pausanias make Medea present herself to Pelias as a suppliant, complaining of the wrongs she had suffered from Jason. But Hartung's attempt to assign the version of Diodorus to Euripides, and that of Ovid to Sophocles, cannot be supported. Ovid and Hyginus entirely omit the motives which • served to excuse the cruelty of the revenge taken ; but it is incredible that Sophocles took no account of this tragic element in the story. The cruelty of Pelias is recorded by Diodorus and Apollodorus; but the narrative of Diodorus is known to be based on the prose romance of Dionysius Scytobrachion {c. 150 B.C.: Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa v 930), and contains several incidents which can hardly have come from an Attic tragedian1. There is thus no evidence which we can safely use in reconstructing the 1 Welcker, however, attributed this version to Sophocles. Robert, Arch. Ztg. 1875, p. 134, referred it to the Peliades. On the other hand, Schwartz, de Dionys. Scytobr. p. 9, supposed that Ovid derived his material from Euripides, and that Diodorus was indebted to some later tragedy. A sculptured relief representing Medea and the Peliades is connected with this play by F. Winter in Neue Jahrb. f. kl. Altert. XXIII (1909) 706.

174

plot of Sophocles; but the unanimity of the authorities in stating that the boiling of the ram was the device which prevailed with the Peliades, makes it highly probable that it was used by both tragic poets. Welcker thinks that both in Sophocles and Euripides the climax was reached when Medea signalled to Jason from the roof of the palace—a guess probable enough, but unsupported by evidence. He also conjectures that the action of the play began with Medea's herb-gathering, and that the introductory matter was explained in a narrative prologue. It may be questioned whether the chorus of pi^orofioi was composed simply of attendants of Medea, or comprised the king's daughters and other maidens from Iolcus. Nauck assigns to this play fr. 830: see also on fr. 648.

534 17 8' e^oTTicraj x e /°° OTTOV ap-ywe^r} crrdtpvTa /caSois S 534.

Tpeirov
1 op.fj.aa-i TpeTrovaa P (cod. Paris. 6371 saec. Xi) 6

K

2

3 Kadios P

5 3 4 Macrobius Sat. 5. 19. 8 haec res 35°' 5 § avrbs 5' aTovoa(pi rpairiadai. nonne quaestione digna est, unde Vergilio Theocr. 24. 94 pi^/droj ev /j,a\a iravav (Aen. 4. 513) 'aeneae fakes' in mentem tiirip irora/iolo cf>4povtKJ>oiai.v oii/uurui. Horn. the same writer refers to the schol. on

PIZOTOMOI cu Se KaXvTrral KMTTOLl

f>l£,(t>V KpVTTTOVCTt,

TOfJLOLS,

a s rjSe fiooHT aka\al,Ofi4vri i7ju.a S 4 Ka\vwTal Valckenaer : KaXvirrpai. P

coni. Ellendt

5 KpwirTov
7 rop.as post SpeTrdpois habet P, delevit Bentley

the strange sounds heard in the wild rites of non-Hellenic deities, such as Cybele (Eur. Bel. 1352) and Cotytto (Aesch. fr. 57), or with portentous and supernatural 430 Antigone pours the xocu for Polynices voices (Hdt. 8. 37). Hence we find a iK...(iiKpoTriTOV x X / c ^ a s Trp6%ov. See &\a\ayfj,6s etc. used in Plutarch of also ConingtoTi on Yerg. /.<•., Gruppe, the cries of lost souls (ser. num. vind. 895!. In Ov, j^a^. 2. 577 the witch 22 p. 564 TS,fac. orb. lun. 29 p. 944 B), of pierces the fish's head acu aena.—xaX- mourning women (consol. 7 p. 610 c), and Keourt is dissyllabic, as in Eur. Phoett. of the distracted ravings of Marius (Mar. '359 (xaX/cois G only). 45). dXaXdfecrSai, therefore, does not ap4 KaXinrToC: see cr. n. There is pear to be out of place when applied to a similar error in Aesch. Ag. 319 where the sorceress Medea in her invocation of Hecate (cf. fr. 535). It must be admitted Canter restored K6.TOWTOI> for KaroTcrpov. ' It probably refers to some coverings in that ohokvfeiv is used by Ap. Rh. 3. 1215 which the KWTO.I were wrapped,—to of the nymphs accompanying Hecate, mark their sacred or mystic character' and ulttlare by Hor. Sat. 1. 8. 25, Ov. Met. 7. 190: but some confusion of the (J.). I should prefer to regard the verbal adjective as having an active sense: so two words was inevitable, and we are &.\j/avaTos 0. T. 969 (where see Blaydes), not justified in altering the text. avToyvwros Ant. 875, Travavpros El. 851 7 "yvjjtvT]. Herwerden wished to read (J.'s n.), XU/3?JT6S Phil. 607, ^/ITTATJKTOS Trpvfui'as, comparing Horn. M 149 (SXriv)

Theocr. 2. 36 TOP yap XGXKOI' titrfiov iv rats e/cXeii^em T77S HCXT)!^! zeal iv rofs KaroiXO.uePOis, ^ir«5?j epo/iifcTo Ka.da.pbs ehat KO.1 aire\a<jTiKos T&V /ua/T/xdrup. I n -Jre?.

Ai. 1358, 7re/)tppi'ros Eur. Phoen. 209, d,u0iXeicTos ib. 500, /xeeeros Ar. Av. 1620, ei\oi56priTos Plut. amat. 13 p . 757 A, avoiKovb[j.T)Tos de curios. 5 p . 517 E. See

also the comm. on Ant. i o n KaXrarTJs 7ri/xeX77S, and n. on fr. 349. 6 dXo\aJo|i^vi]: see cr. n. Nauck (Index, p. xin) accepted Ellendt's conjecture. dXaAij is the joyous cry of victory, and is associated in consequence with the gods who are supreme in war (Pind. fr. 22; 'AXaXd, IloXe/iOU Siyarep), such as Ares (Cornut. 21) and Athena (Pind. 01. 7. 37). It is true that in general the d\a\ay/j.6s of men answers to the 6\o\vyp.6s of women: Heliod. 3. 5 wXiXvfai' ixh a.1 yvveuKes, lyXdXafai' 5' oi avSpes, on the occasion of a procession at Delphi in honour of Neoptolemus. But, if the circumstances so required, the more sonorous cry might be uttered by women: Eur. Bacch. 1133 at 8' ^XdXafop, of the infuriated Bacchanals. The word is more particularly connected with

Trpv[/.vi]v tKTa.fxvovT€S; but

that

would

destroy a touch characteristic of magic ceremony, i.e. the laying aside of the upper garment. So Verg. Aen. 4. 518, Hor. Epod. -,. 25 expedita Sagana, where the schol. has : ' succincta, ne defluentes vestes impedimento essent,' Sat. 1. 8. 23 vidi egomet nigra succinctam vadere palla \ Canidiam pedibus midis, Ov. Met. 7. 182 (of Medea) egreditur tectis vestes induta recinctas, j nuda pedem, nndos ttmeris infusa capillos, Senec. Med. 756 secreta nudo nemora lustravi pede. Mekler refers to Heim, Incanta?n. mag., Lips. 1892, p. 508, who brings forward several examples to show the importance attached to nudity in the celebration of magic rites ; and also to Jos. Hookenbach, de nnditale sacra, Giessen, 1911. See also Warde Fowler, Roman Festivals, p. IO92.—xa^Kt0LS Sptirdvots, =falcibits aenis Verg. I.e. So Ov. Mel. 7. 227 (of Medea) partim succidit curvamine falcis aenae.

IOcJ>OKAEOYZ

535 *HA.ie BecnroTa Kal irvp Itpov, TTJS etvoSias 'EKarrfs eyx os > TO St Ovkvfx.TTOv < irpo > TroXoucra Kai yrjs vaiova-" iepas r/ndSovs. crTe
2 elvoSias Itali: &>o8(as L

3 Ov\i/nvov Valckenaer: 'OXi/nrov L |

irpoiro\oS ye Valckenaer, Trb\ovaa '
535

Schol. Ap. Rhod. 3. 1214 Sri

bpaKoixn Kal Spvtvtf (cXdSij) trrifeTai T\ 'YiKa.rr\ Kai Soflio/cXijs £v 'Pifori/iois TOV

Xop'ov veiroiriKe \iyovra 1

'"HXie...8pa-

1 ff. irCp KTf. ' Thou hallowed fire, weapon of Hecate the road-goddess, that she bears when ministering in Olympus on high and in her haunts by the sacred cross-ways on earth.' There can be no doubt that Sophocles here connects Hecate with Helios as the moon-goddess, while at the same time recognizing the other (chthonian) aspect of her power (v. 4). In both capacities she wields the torch, to which are to be referred her

Hecate in the exercise of her sacred function: see on fr. 782.—irpoiro\o«aydirri

titles (pua(j>bpos ( E u r . Hel. 569 n . ) , hq.ho- frrXer' toaaaa. Discussing ' the Hesiodic

(pbpos (Jebb on Bacchyl. fr. 23) and the like. Most of the authorities (e.g. Stending in Roscher I 1888) treat this function as the natural attribute of a lunar goddess; but Farnell (Cults of Greek States, 11 p. 549) thinks that the torch was originally a chthonian symbol. See also Heckenbach in PaulyWissowa VII 2777- Similarly Artemis was a/ujilTrvpos (Track.

216, cf.

O.T.

ao6): the double torch is explained by Wiener (Rh. Mus. LVIII 333) as referring to the division of the month into two halves.—ctvoSCas, as a title of Hecate, is for the most part associated with chthonian worship: see Jebb on Ant. 1199. Possibly it was suggested by fear of brigands: Heckenbach, I.e. 2775. Cf. E u r . Hel. 570 ov WKTt<pavTov irpbiroXoy ivodias /a' o/jys (n.), Ion 1048 Elvo8la...a

p

tyx>

weapon, is applied somewhat vaguely to the torch, as an instrument borne by

Hecate' (Hes. Th. 4 u f f . ) in CR. XII 392, G. C. W. Warr inferred that 'her special participation in sacrificial offerings to the gods must be explained in the sense that offerings were made through her to greater deities, whose servant she •was.'—TpioSous: ' she was the goddess of the cross-ways not necessarily because if we travel by night the moonlight is desirable when we come to them, but very possibly because she was the mistress of ghosts, and the cross-ways were haunted.' Farnell in C. R. II 167: and so Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 1291. Cf. Cornut. 34. p. 72 Lang ivTevSev (from the three phases of the moon) ijSi) Kai Tpwdirts eirejcXiJflij Kal TQ>V rpibSav eirbirrrii ivofit
5 f. Spvt. For the crowning of Hecate with oak-leaves there does not seem

PIZOTOMOI — ZAAMQNEYI

177

to be any authority beyond this passage cf. Lucian Philops. 22 Kal TO. ji&v ZvepBev and Ap. Rhod. 3. 1215 w4pi£ 84 fuv dtpibirovs fjv, ra Be yopybvi ipQepr]! rb iTO | <jfiepSa\4oi

Spvtvoun

/ierd

{2\4fj.[JLa,...Kal avrl TTJS KbfiTjS TOVS

vrbpSoiai. Sp&Kovres. Cf. however Porphyr. Kovras de abst.

2.

16 KOTO fiijva iKaurov TOIS

voviiyvlais ffTetpavovvTa Kal (paidpivovra T&V 'Epfiijv Kal TT)V "EKO.TT]I>. Blaydes

strangely conjectured KVVL—irXwrois, which was corrupted to ifkelarovs, is a good instance of the confusion of K and 12: see Cobet, V.L. p. 124.—SpaKovTtov:

poaTpvxvSbv el\ov/j.4vovs T€pl TQV a$x^va WIXWP (vlovs taTreipafiivovs.

Spd-

wepi^Keiro, -l ^l ^cDy Gruppe,

Kct

Gr. Myth. p. 12892, denies that she is represented in art either as wreathed with serpents or in serpent form. See also Heckenbach, Lc. •2773.

536 Kopov atcrT&Jcras 536 536

irvpi

urrt&cras irvp cod.: corr. Musurus

Hesych. I p. 87 aiaruxjas- dia-

bat.' Still less attractive is Hartung's

' Kbpov iarwiras irvp.' Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 55, 25 auTTtlxraf avrl rod diax^as, T7j£as. 2O0OK\?}S.

The magical practice in which a waxen image is burnt or stabbed, either as a love-charm or in order to cause death or sickness, is sufficiently well known. Cf.

Ellendt appears to be right in understanding Kopov as a waxen puppet or doll fashioned to represent the victim, which the sorcerer melts in the fire in order to make his magic influence effective. But, when he flatly asserts that the Kbpos represents Jason, who is bewitched by Medea, he overlooks the gender of the participle. This meaning of Kbpos (not recognized by L. and S.) is implied in KopoirKados, and the word itself is found in Suid. s.v. KoponXddof oi rois Kbpovs TrkaTTOvres Kypy v 7i>i/'ijj = Timaeus, ed.

Ruhnk. p. 165.

So Harpocr. s.v. Kopo-

TrXdBos, who gives Kbpas rj Kbpovs, and

Ruhnken shows that Kbpy] is better attested. Kiister's Kt\pbv gives the same sense, and in that case alariiaas is required, a form which might he justified by Ai. 515 ffii ydp /tot TrarpLd' yjarxaas

dopi. Duentzer, who refers to Pind. fr. 123, 6, thinks that the melting of wax was introduced to symbolize the wasting power of love. But the change does not seem to be necessary. Brunck strangely preferred Kbprp with the explanation ' de Jasone, qui Medeam ure-

T h e o c r . 2 . 2 8 ths TOVTOV rbv Kijpbv iyw <7VV datflOVl TJlKti), I US TaKOld' U7T* £ph)TOS

0 MiVSios airUa Plato's

Kripiva

A4\(pis.

fj.ifj.7ifj.aTa

Such are TreirKaafUva

(legg. 933 B). SO Hor. Epod. 17. 76 cereas imagines, Sat. 1. 8. 30, Verg. Eel. 8. 76, Ov. Her. 6. 91 devovet absentes simulacraque cerea fingit, et miserum tenues in iecur urget acus. The medieval witches went through exactly the same ceremonies. A graphic account is given in Holinshed's Chronicle of the bewitching of King Duffe: ' w h o found one of the Witches resting upon a woodden broche an image of waxe at the fire, resembling in ech feature the kings person, made and devised as is to be thought, by craft and art of the Devill: an other of them sat reciting certain words of enchantment, and still basted the image with a certain licour very busily' (History oj Scotland, VI p. 207). Although, as already observed, the words of the fragment cannot apply directly to Medea, it is natural to suppose that her sorceries are actually in question.

IAAMQNEYI SATYPIKOZ Salmoneus was an Aeolid, brother of Sisyphus, Athamas, and Cretheus (Apollod. 1. 51), and father of Tyro (Horn. X 235, p. 11.

i;8

IO*OKAEOYI

Apollod. I. 90). Originally a Thessalian, he migrated to Elis, where he founded the town known as Salmone (Steph. Byz. p. 552, 5, Strabo 356), or Salmonia (Diod. 4. 68) in Pisatis1. Cf. Eur. fr. i4"EXX?7i> yap> **? \eyovffi, jiyverai Ato?, | rod 8' Ai'oXo? irals, AloXov Be Xio<} | 'A^a/ict? re K.ptjOev'i 0' o? T' eV 'A\eiov poais \ Oeov fiai/els eppitye SaX^.ojj'ev? \oja. H e was

a typical vfipLGTrjs, and was punished for his insolent presumption in aspiring to be the equal of Zeus. In a literal sense he violated Pindar's precept fj.i] /jbdreve Zeus yevecrdai {Isth. 4. 14).

Salmoneus claimed to be Zeus himself, and ordered the sacrifices to be made to him which were usually reserved for Zeus. He even mocked the divine attributes by fastening to his chariot tanned hides and brazen bowls so contrived as to imitate the noise of thunder, and by copying the lightning with blazing torches hurled into the sky. But Zeus struck him with his bolt, and destroyed his city and all its inhabitants (Apollod. 1. 89: cf. Hygin. fab. 61). Vergil's allusion to him (Aen. 6. 585 ff.) must be quoted in full: vidi et crudelis dantem Salmonea poenas, dum flammas Iovis et sonitus imitatur Olympi*. quattuor hie invectus equis et lampada quassans per Graium populos mediaeque per Elidis urbem ibat ovans, divumque sibi poscebat konorem, demens! qui nimbos et non imitabile fulmen aere et cornipedum pulsu simularet equorum. at pater omnipotens densa inter nubila telum contorsit, non Me faces nee fumea taedis lumina, praecipitemque immani turbine adegit. What aere meant in v. 591 is doubtful; and some have inclined to the view that a brazen bridge was intended, as also by Manilius (5. 91 ff.). Anyhow, it is clear that Vergil did not follow the same authority as Apollodorus. The legend was known to Hesiod in some form; for he calls Salmoneus aZuttos (fr. 7, 5 Rz.). Eustath. Od. p. 1681, 63, denying that the impiety of Salmoneus was known to Homer, ascribes its notoriety to oi vecorepoi. There is no trace of dramatic action in the story of Salmoneus so far as it is known to us; but the sources are none too copious. 1

For the historical significance of this see Wilamowitz, Isyllos, p. 101. The commentators have discovered extraordinary subtleties of meaning in dum imitatur, because they refuse to face the facts. Let anyone consider Cic. Tusc. 1. 101 die, hospes, Spartae nos te hie vidisse iacentis, | dum sanctis patriae legibus obsequimur; and, even without the help of the original, S £ei
179 1

Robert has recently referred to the play of Sophocles for the interpretation of a much-disputed vase-painting. It was originally published by E. A. Gardner in A. J. Arch. 1899, III 331, and explained by him as depicting the madness of Athamas. Subsequently, at the suggestion of Miss Harrison made independently of Robert, it was referred to Salmoneus by A. B. Cook in C. R. xvii 276, where a reproduction is given. But Cook did not bring in Sophocles. Robert supposes that Salmoneus was put in chains by his subjects as a madman2, and was represented brandishing his sham thunderbolt, after he had broken loose. Even if it were certain, the identification would not carry us far. Anthropologists seem to be agreed that Salmoneus was originally a rain-maker, and that his action was afterwards misunderstood : see Frazer, G.B? I p. 113; History of Kingship, p. 197; Reinach, RA 1903, p. I54fif.; Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 82O5; J. E. Harrison, Themis, p. 79.

537 1

r a S ' icrTL KVMTfib ; /cat i\r)fia.Ta)v \poo<;T(o KaWvKocrcrafSovvTi, viKrjTrjpia Tidrjfju KOL /SaXouTL ^aX/cetof Kapa. 537.

2 KaKhiKOTrafiodvTi Athen.

3 x^K^0V

Blaydes

5 3 7 Athen. 487 D KaXeirai Se yadvijs (jTaiMeda. Antiphanesfr. 55, II 33K. Eur. xai rb iwl TOO KOTT&fiov ((pear-rinds, i05. Jacobs proposed to remedy delabrum (pdfidos), is surrounded at a this by substituting rdS' tare, Kvurfiovs... third of its height by a basin, and in a \p6<povs, and removing the stop at the end socket at the top is a small bronze figure of the line; the result would be satisfactory with one leg and arm raised (the p.di>i]s). (see on fr. 282), but the means are someDiet. Ant. 1 559.' Cf. Critias fr. 1 B. what violent. M. Schmidt altered VI.KTJic6TTa/3o5 4K StjceX^s eon x^ov°s iKirpewis Trjpia to viK-t\Tf\pi a. Schweighauser £pyov I 8K GKoirbv is \araywv T<5fa Ka8i- preferred to put a full stop after rdS' 1 Apophoreton der XLVII Versammlung deutscher Philol. u. Schulmanner, iiberreicht von der Graeca Halensis, Berlin 1903, p. 105. 2 Ilberg in Roscher iv 292 thinks that he was put in chains in consequence of the. oppression of his subjects, who had risen against him.

12—2

I04>0KAE0YI

i8o

iarl Kvurfihi and simply to accept To the substitution of a for rip, as suggested by Adam and Villebrun, he objected that the article cannot be spared ; but this surely depends on the context. Enger read riBiiaeva for riBri/u. Campbell proposed vdpean for rdS' earl, Wecklein more boldly yX&a
tcviaubv...

yj/txpov. None of these corrections is convincing, and it is hazardous to alter

the idiomatic rdS' iarl (Eur. Or. 1508, Hclid. 793 n.), which may have referred backward rather than forward.—In v. 3 Nauck's suggested rip pdXXovn (for mi pakSvTi) is condemned by Eur. fr. 562. X<XXK«OV. There is no obvious reason why the epic form of the adjective should appear here only in tragedy, and Blaydes is perhaps right in regarding it as an error for ^

538 ^ av Kepavvia /ecu irefAt.£ ere ftpovrrjs /cat Sucrooyuas /3d\oL> S38.

1 sq. Kepavvia 7T^tt0iif
right in treating wvori as the central idea: cf. Lat. aura.—Sinrocrp.Cas refers to the SaX/iacei (raripots ' «ai T&%' • • .X&jiSoi.' sulphurous fumes left behind by the lightning: Sen. nat. qu. 2. 53. 2 quoThe reference is to the punishment of Salmoneus. Dobree points out (Adv. 11 cumque decidit fulmen, ibi odorem esse 365) that KepavvCa ir£|u|>i| ppovrtjs is a sulpuris cerium est, Lucr. 6. 220 inusta vaporis \ signa nolaeque gravis halantis case of hypallage, like etesia flabra aquisulpuris auras. Cf. Horn, jit 415 Zeus lonum (Lucr. 5. 742). On such transS'ti.fj.vdisfSpovrrjcrerai?,u/3a\e VT\K Kepawbv ferences of the epithet see Headlam in I TI S' iXeXtx^i] iraaa Atbs jr\ijye(
539 Tracrav o\\iiv dyye\(p 539

nvp6<s

fyiv dyytXip Bentley: dfiayiXav codd.

5 3 9 Galen XVII 1. p. 88r ivl di rov vi(povs SOKCT (sc. nt/upt^) rerdx^tu Kara rdde rb tiros iv ZaX/iuveT aaripais vapa S0Xf ' d ' py i The words •jrdtrav oijiiv cannot be explained in the absence of the context: Hermann wished to substitute TrX-qaas for iraaav and Blaydes TXijfas. Dobree (see on fr. 538) thought that the words in Galen (XiXeKrat. Si OVTOS 6 X6yos Kara p fflX i py il x / t P ) referred to this fr. and not to Ibycus

fr. 17 (see on fr. 337), which ought to be transposed so as to precede it. We should interpret irifi^iyi dyyi\
lAAMQNEYI—IINQN

181

54° KapLKol Tpdyoi 54O Hesych. 11 p. 413 Kapifcoi rpdyor us tt)TeX&/ ivruv. 2o0o/cXJjs SoX/tucet.

XiffTUToi. Prov. app. i. 60 (Paroem. I 405) iv Kapds fjLoipq.' yyovv iv SoijXov rd^ei. et /*^ &pa itro Kapi Ki.v5vvevcroy.ev, a n d with Cilician goats had more learning than humour. The long-haired Cilician other passages quoted by the schol. on Plat. Lack. 187 B. Cic. Flacc. 65 at Ma goats were of considerable value in conCaria nonne hoc vestra voce volgatum est, nexion with the manufacture of the stuff known as cilicium (Plin. n.h. 8. 203). si quid cum periculo experiri velis, in Kopaarrisrpdyos(Cratin. fr. 338,1 112 K.), Care id potissimum esse faciendum? Diogen. 6. 24 Avdoi wovqpoi, Setirepoi 5' if rightly corrected, may mean either AiyviTTioi, I Tpiroi Se TT&VTO)I> Kapes e£w- bearded or Cilician.

541 5 4 1 Hesych. n p. 315 8ij/j.aT&ipos, dvd.$yjfj.a [6.vdijtJ.a cod.) Z SaAjUUjpe? (trctA/xoi/et cod.). ' Incertum quomodo Soph, sit voce usus: puto autem de donario,' Ellendt. But he has missed the significance of Td0os, which points to the particular application of the other words. 6rj|ia is an erection in honour of the dead (cf.

IINQN Aristotle mentions a Sinon—presumably the play of Sophocles —amongst the btragedies which were drawn from the Little Iliad {poet. 23. I459 7). If Proclus is to be trusted, the Little Iliad broke off at the point where the Trojans resolved to drag the Wooden Horse into the city, and the Iliupersis began with the debate as to what should be done with it1. Although Sinon is only named in connexion with the Iliupersis, as having entered the city in a feigned character, and afterwards lighted a torch to summon back the Greeks from Tenedos {EGF p. 49), it would 1 The question of the inter-relation of these epics has already (p. 163) been mentioned. See also Frazer's Pausanias, v p. 362 f., Monro's Odyssey, p. 343.

i82

IO<1>OKAEOYZ

seem that he must have had a place in both poems, as the order of the narrative in Apollodorus (epit. 5. 15, 19) suggests. Moreover, Tzetzes on Lycophr. 344 quotes a line of Lesches (fr. 11 K.), in referring to the occasion when Sinon held up the torch after having persuaded the Trojans by his cunning to drag the horse into the city. But it is sufficient for the present purpose to know that Sophocles undoubtedly derived the story of Sinon from the epic Cycle. The nature of the stratagem by which Sinon induced the Trojans to compass their own ruin is familiar to every one from Vergil's description (Aen. 2. 57—194), and need not be recapitulated here. How far Vergil, when composing Sinon's eloquent appeal, may have used the Sophoclean model, it is impossible to say ; but Heyne long since recognized that the speech was instinct with the spirit of Attic tragedy1. In v. 256 Vergil follows a version which differs from the old tradition, by making the ship of Agamemnon light a flare on the return from Tenedos as a signal for Sinon to open the horse. This corresponds with the passage in Aen. 6. 518, where Helen holds up a torch on the acropolis as a signal to Agamemnon2. Hygin. fab. 108 seems to follow Vergil; but Quint. 13. 23, Diet. 5. 12, and Tzetz. Posthom. 721 all agree with the version of the Cycle. According to Serv. Verg. Aen. 2. 79 and Tzetz. Lycophr. 344 Sinon was son of Aesimus, grandson of Autolycus and Amphithea, and so, through Anticlea, a first cousin of Odysseus. Holzinger on Lycophr. I.e. thinks that the genealogy was at least as old as Sophocles. Tiimpel, on the other hand (Pauly-Wissowa II 1085, 1957), regards it as due to a confusion by the mythographer of the Homeric Amphithea with the wife of Tennes. But the tradition is clearly older than Lycophron, who must have had some authority for calling Sinon iLiavfyeia ieiva8o<;. Maass in Henn. xvn 618 conjectured that the name Sinon was a shortened form of Sinopos, the eponymous founder of Sinope. Quintus (12. 353 fF.) differs from the Vergilian account by making Sinon submit to mutilation and torture at the hands of the Trojans before he will consent to reveal his story. But, according to Tryphiod. 219 ff., Sinon voluntarily allowed his body to be disfigured with wounds before the Greeks departed3, 1 ' Fuit Sinon etiam fabulae Sophocleae argumentum Hesychio laudatae. Ex hac aut alia tragoedia profeeisse videtur Virgilius in Sinonis oratione, quae Graecarum tragoediarum eloquentiam et acumen redolet.' Excursus IV. 2 See also on fr. 177. 3 So schol. Lycophr. p. 134, 12 8s alKurdfiepos iavrdv wXriatov TOV Sovpelov twirov imB-qTO. Immisch in Roscher IV 939 f. argues the existence of two distinct epic versions: in the Little Iliad, in which he gave his signal from the tomb of Achilles, and therefore did not enter the city, Sinon played an entirely subordinate part. See

IINQN

183

in order that the Trojans might discover him in this condition, and the more readily believe his tale.

542 aldv(T(TtLV 542

Hesych. I p. 77 a'Maaav •

the same play; but it is not easy to

&i>a. Xivuvi 2O<J>OK\TJS. ibid. p. 173choose between them. Eur. Tro. 344 dvaidiatrw dvaaeioi. Zo0o/c\^s Sinawi draitfiWeis
Cf. Bekk. anecd. p. 360, 21 aWiaaeiv avatreiew,

dva.Ka.iuv: for the last word

Ellendt wrongly conjectured dvaKivelv, and the text is now confirmed by Phot, ed. Reitz. p. 50, 12 atduffffetv dvaKaitw, dvaadeiv. It seems improbable that Soph, used both aWiaanv

in the case of so rare a word, and there was evidently some ancient authority for the use of the simple verb as ' to kindle.' Perhaps it was applied to the torch, with which Sinon signalled to the fleet (EGF p. 49, Apollod. epit. 5. 15, 19).

and avai6ti in

543 apprjTov 5 4 3 Hesych. 1 p. 289 appyrov of dpijros from del P'T)T6S, i.e. ad 5ia a<j>pa. 2O0OK\T/S (rvvibvvtwv iitTTepos. T w o glosses

are there run together, and the obscure •wokvxpoviov is explained by the derivation

belonged to appijTos, and Alberti (after Scaliger) emended the two last to XLvavi diwTipijros. If this is right, the quotation illustrates the less common sense ' unrecorded, unprecedented ' : cf. Bacchyl. fr. 14 (4 J.) ovSi yap pfixrov iviav iriiXas \ i^evpeiv.

544 544

Hesych. 11 p. 99 evSpiaKros'

evdouuLwii Kalevd^aKTOS.

^OOK\7JS

XLvoivi.

For ivdeaKTos M. Schmidt conj. ivdea-

ibid. p . r08 evTe$pio}Kev' iveiXtjKei/ 7) e, dvb TCIV Bpiwv. SrjKoi be Kai TO /3aKxetf«u>, iffws d:r6 rod Aiovijtrov KTC. ,

84aaTos? where evdptbdi and fydptdfa are confused.

evSe&f&rfftu is common in late Greek. The lemma may belong to Menand. Sam. 241, but the latter part of the gloss is For Spidfw see on fr. 466. Just before clearly intended for evreBpiaicev, which this gloss Hesych. has ivdpidfeiv irapahas been conjectured in fr. 15. Kivc'iv. dirb rdf HO.VTI.KCIV dpi&v. Cf.

also Bethe in Rh. A/us. XLVI 518 ff., who conjectures that the increased importance of Sinon was due to Sophocles.

184

IOOKAEOYI

The punishment of Sisyphus (Horn. \ 593 etc.) is better known than the crime for which he was condemned. But in the play the fate of Sisyphus in Hades can only have been mentioned in the concluding scene. For the main course of the action we are left to choose between various accounts of his offence. (1) He is said to have betrayed the plans of the gods (Serv. on Verg. Aen. 6. 616); but that is perhaps only a generalization from (2) the story that Sisyphus blabbed to Asopus that Zeus had carried off his daughter Aegina (Apollod. 1. 85 etc.). (3) Hyginus {fab. 60) states that he was punished propter impietatem. Sisyphus, in feud with his brother Salmoneus, was told by Apollo that, if his brother's daughter Tyro should bear children to him, they would avenge him on Salmoneus. But Tyro, hearing of their destiny, destroyed the children whom Sisyphus had begotten. A lacuna in the text prevents us from discovering the crime of which Sisyphus was subsequently guilty. But these stories are not characteristic of the knavish cunning for which the name of Sisyphus became a by-word: see on fr. 567. Even in Homer he was KepSiaTos dvBpiSv (Z 153). (4) Pherecydes {FHG 191), after giving the same account as Apollodorus of the original offence, makes Zeus punish Sisyphus in the first place by sending Death to him. Sisyphus seized Death, and put him in chains, so that no one died, until Ares released Death and handed over Sisyphus to him. But Sisyphus was not at the end of his resources ; for he commanded his wife Merope to omit the usual funeral rites. Accordingly, when Sisyphus was in Hades, and the offerings due to the gods of the nether world were withheld, he persuaded Persephone to let him go back to earth and punish his wife for her neglect. But, when he got home, he refused to return, until he was ultimately dragged back by force: see schol. Soph. Phil.

625 icd£ "AiSov

Qavcov | 7rpo? cj>w<; aveXdeiv,

wairep oviceLvov TraT-rjp—a passage which favours the conclusion that these incidents were comprised in the plot of the Sisyphus. The story was known to Theognis (702 ff.): trXeiova S' elBel-r]? ^,iavcj)ov AloXiSeco, \ Bare KOX e£

AtSeiw •jroXvihpitjat.v

dvrjXdev,

Tretcra? Tlepcrecfiovtjv aifivXtotao \070t?. Its dramatic possibilities are obvious, and the title 'Zlavfyos SpaTrerr)<; indicates that it formed the subject of a satyr-play of Aeschylus (TGF p. 74). It is uncertain whether the 2to-u<£o? TrerpoKvXiaT^ {ibid.) was a separate play; but, though regarded by Welcker (Nachtr. p. 316) as a tragedy, its satyric character seems to be established1. 1 Fr. 233 is probably decisive, since the ' Aetnaean beetle' is essentially a comic touch (Soph. fr. 162). Wilamowitz, Horn. Unters. p. 202, doubts the authenticity of the story attributed to Pherecydes.

IIIY4>0I—IKY0AI

185

Euripides wrote a satyric Sisyphus produced with the Troades in 415 B.C. (Aelian var. hist. 2. 8). There was also a play by Critias so entitled (TGF p. 771). Welcker (p. 402) thought that the solitary quotation from the Sisyphus of Sophocles was an error, and that the intention was to refer to Aeschylus. This is an opinion that can neither be proved nor refuted. It should be added that Aristotle, taking Sisyphus as the typical example of the defeat of a clever rogue, regards the subject as rpayiKov ical fyikdvBpanrov {poet. 18. 1456s 21).

545 545

rpi.#>yu>v Musurus : fry&v cod.

5 4 5 Hesych. II p. 256 fevyos rpnr&pBevov BupiiriS?;?'Epex^a (fr. 357). mi 2O0OK\T)S Sifficpy' xaf><-Tb>v firyfiv.' 'ApiaTo<j>&i>r}s p"fipcus , I 539)K . ) Kara( (fr. 57 5 7 6 539 & rpi&v & (eiri ( i TO yff cod.) d) XPQ eirii T&V TO fauyos £&T]K€ ' fevyos rpidouXov ' (-up cod.). The compound, so far as it goes beyond the idea of 'three,' implies a trinity exercising co-ordinate functions. Thus it may point to a closer union here than when applied to Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite in Eur. Hel. 357 (n.). rpifuyees Xdpires occurs also in Macedonius (c. f-,0 A.D.), A.P. n . 27. The force of

the compound is similar to diaroXovs d5e\0
2KY0AI The contents of the fragments show that the play was concerned with the expedition of the Argonauts. Welcker1 called attention to a statement of the grammarian Sergius, explan. in Donat. Gramm. Lat. IV. p. 490, 21 Keil: aliam scripsit Medeam Sophocles, item in alio furoris actu aliam Euripides, aliam diversi scriptores. ergo non de Mis Medeis sentimus, quae occideruntfilios suos, quasi multae smt, sed de illis quae scriptae sunt per varios auctores. From this he drew the inference that in the 'S.icvOai Medea was delineated as frenzied owing to the faithlessness of her lover, since in the other plays in which she appeared (Ko\;j£tSe9 and 'Pi^orofioi) she had no occasion to exhibit this 1

P-337ff.

186

IO*OKAEOYS

passion; and further, that the situation must have been analogous to that of the fourth book of Apollonius, where the Colchians under the leadership of Apsyrtus overtook the Argonauts, and Medea treacherously betrayed her brother's life to Jason. Nauck thinks that the grammarian invented a Medea of Sophocles for his own purposes; but, even if he did follow some genuine tradition, his words are too vague to justify any inference concerning the plot of the Scythae. In any case, it is certain that the story of Sophocles cannot have been the same as that of Apollonius. For (i) fr. 546 shows that in the play Apsyrtus was still a child; and (2) fr. 547 (n.) that the geographical conditions assumed by Apollonius were entirely different from those in Sophocles. Is there, then, any evidence which will help to determine the subject ? The locality of the action may surely be inferred from the title, confirmed as it is by the mention of the Tanais in fr. 548, and the reference to Achillean barley in fr. 551 (n.)1. If, then, some point on the north-west coast of the Euxine was the scene of the play, we may proceed to enquire what adventure of the Argonauts is connected with that region. Fr. 546 proves that the plot cannot have belonged to the outward journey, and we may therefore leave out of account the arrival at Tauri, where Perses brother of Aeetes was king, as recorded by Diod. 4. 44. Inasmuch as we are limited to the homeward voyage, the pursuit by the Colchians and the death of Apsyrtus, which are variously related in the different versions, are the only subjects appropriate to the conditions. Now, the geographical data exclude the version of Pherecydes {FHG I 89), in which the limbs of Apsyrtus were thrown into the Phasis, and that of Hyginus {fab. 26) and other late authorities, who name Apsaros, a place in the south-east corner of the Euxine, as the scene of the murder. The story of Apollodorus (1.133) and Ovid alone remains, and seems to provide exactly what is required. Apollodorus relates that, when Medea saw her father's ship getting nearer, she slew her brother, and having cut his body into pieces threw them into the sea. Aeetes delayed the pursuit in order to collect the limbs; and then buried such as he could find at a place to which he gave the name Tomi. The situation of Tomi, where Ovid remained in banishment, was on the west coast of the Euxine, not far to the south of the mouth of the Ister; and Ovid frequently speaks of himself as living among the Scythians {e.g. Trist. 4. 9.17, Pont. 4. 6. 5). The same neigh1 Nevertheless Vater {Argonautenzug, 11 152) finds the plot in the Phaeacian episode of Apoll. Rh. 4. 1001 ff. The same considerations apply to Ahrens, who puts the scene of the action in Greece, and apparently thinks that the plot was similar to that of Euripides' Medea.

IKYOAI

187

bourhood is brought into connexion with the murder of Apsyrtus by Aelian {nat. an. 14. 25), who speaks of the natives as living on the boundaries of Scythia, and as engaged in repelling the attacks of its inhabitants. It will be observed that Apollodorus supposes that the murder took place on the ship, and that the mutilated members were thrown into the sea. This proceeding could not have been represented in a tragedy; and, if reported by a messenger, would have left insufficient material for the rest of the action. It is therefore worthy of remark that Ovid speaks of Apsyrtus' limbs as scattered per agros (Id. 433, Her. 6. 129, Trist. 3. 9. 27). According to the last-quoted passage, the Argonauts had landed at the spot afterwards known as Tomi, when the fleet of Aeetes was seen approaching. Consequently they were obliged to make a sudden departure, and Medea bethought herself of the horrid device in order to detain her father. But the same phrase recurs in Accius (fr. incert. XCIII, from Cic. n. d. 3. 67): postquam pater adpropinquat iamque paene tit comprekendatur parat, puerum interea optruncat membraque articulatim dividit perque agros passim dispergit corpus; id ea gratia, ut dum nati dissupatos artus captaret parens, ipsa interea effugeret, ilium ut maeror tardaret sequi, sibi salutem ut familiari pareret parricidio. Hence Zollner (Analecta Ovidiana, p. 48) drew the inference that Ovid followed the description of Accius, and reconstructed his Medea on that assumption. Ribbeck (Rom. Trag. p. 53°) had previously suggested on different grounds that the Medea (or Argonautae) of Accius followed the Scythae of Sophocles; and it is therefore possible that in Ovid we may find the traces of Attic tragedy. The argument may be summed up as follows: (1) there is no subject which seems so likely for the Scythae as the story which localized the death of Apsyrtus in Scythia; (2) there are some indications that Ovid's version of this story was influenced by earlier dramatic treatment. It is not a legitimate objection that Sophocles in the Colchides (fr. 343) had represented the murder as perpetrated within the palace of Aeetes. Certainly no tragic poet, when writing a new play taken from a legendary cycle which he had previously used for dramatic purposes, would have considered himself bound to reproduce exactly every detail of his earlier narrative.

i88

204>0KAE0YZ

546 ov yap €K efiXacTTOv, dXX' o [ikv T4KVOV\ dpTL fiXacrTecTKev, tfvf EiSuta irpiv TTOT' 'Q,Keavov erucTev Koprj 5 4 6 . 3 Neaipasadd. Bergk post rinvov \ $\O.GTO.VeaK( TTJV 5' codd. fp Valckenaer | Kopi] TIKTCV L : corr. Bergk, TIKTCI mallet Nauck

4 'Idvia

Schol. Ap. Rhod. 4. 223 ei> Sk however, is more likely to be a careless blunder than to be drawn from an independent authority. An entirely different legend, which cannot be traced further back than DionyValckenaer, diatr. p. 224, restored the sius Scytobrachion (see p. 173)) makes lines as trochaic tetrameters (see cr. n.), Medea the daughter of Hecate and of and was obliged in consequence to reject Aeetes, Hecate's uncle: see Diod. 4. 45, KO£TT|S as a gloss. This is possible (see schol. Ap. Rh. 3. 200 (FffG n 8). e.g. schol. on Track. 911). But it is just as easy (with Bergk) to treat them Leaving out of account the last-menas iambics: v. 3 is in any case corrupt, tioned version, we find traces of two whether or not Bergk's insertion of Neaidifferent stories, according as Apsyrtus pas is right. J. remarks: ' It is perhaps was represented to be older or younger slightly in favour of Bergk's view that than his half-sister. Of these Apollonius trochaic tetrameters imply great exciteadopted the one, and Sophocles the ment. The speaker cannot be Medea other: see on fr. 343. The use of dpTi (as Welcker assumes). Who then should contrasted with irpCv ITOT€ shows that here, speak thus? Possibly Aeetes, if the fact as in the Colchiiies, Apsyrtus was reprethat Apsyrtus was only half-brother of sented as a child. It is generally conMedea was quoted, not to palliate her sidered that schol. Ap. Rh. 3. 242 (fr. conduct, but as helping to explain why 344) is an inexact reference to the present she had no sisterly feeling for him.' passage. The schol., however, distinctly Ribbeck thought that the lines were states that Sophocles made Neaera the spoken by Jason, or one of Medea's mother of Medea; and for aught we partisans; and this is perhaps a better know to the contrary, the account in the view. Colchides may have been to that effect. That Sophocles was not consistent is The parentage of Medea and Apsyrtus perhaps suggested by the words h 5e rois is variously recorded. Hes. Theog. 958: Aeetes, son of Helios, Koiprjv 'iiKeavoto Z,Kv6ais (sitpr.). 2 KOLTT]S here = concubitus, in which ) f yjt jjj sense the plural is more common, as was 'ISviav KaWnrdpyov, who bore to him pointed out by Verrall on Eur. Med. 434. Medea. The author of the Naupactia, 3 pXatTTecrKe and pXaardveo-ice (see one of the later epics, makes Eurylyte cr. n.) are alike unexampled. Dobree, the wife of Aeetes and mother of Apsyrtus who thought the passage came from a (frs. 4, 7 Kink.). Apoll. Rhod. 3. 242 chorus, wished to read j3\d
TOIS Z«'/(?cus 0 2o(f>oK\TJs irepo/iJiTopa rr)s MijSeias rip "A\pvj>Tov\iyei'ovyap..MKrev.'

IKYGAI vincing, is R. Ellis's proposal T\V apri fOXaorq, rrjv 5' 'I5wa irplv irore | 'ilaeavls 0S(r' 1:TIKT€V.

4 ElSvta was altered to 'ISvta (Hesiod, I.e.) by Valckenaer for metrical reasons. In the present state of our knowledge it seems better to follow the MSS.—?TIKT«V :

189

for the prodelision see on Eur. Hel. 263, and for the error in the order of the words on fr. 126. Nauck was not justified in requiring T'IKTU : either might stand, just as in English we might say indifferently ' w a s ' or 'is the mother.'

See Jebb on 0. T. 870.

547 [_'Kpy ovavrutv 5 4 7 Schol. Ap. Rhod. 4. 284 "E
as it became impossible to ignore the traces of their expedition left by the Argonauts in Africa, later accounts brought them back to the Mediterranean Sea from the west. This was effected either by the adoption of a tradition that they sailed up the Tanais to its source, and thence carried their vessel on their shoulders to the shore of the northern ocean (Diod. 4. 56); or in accordance with the version popularized by Apollonius, which rested on the belief that the Danube was divided into two branches and descended by the western of them into the Adriatic Sea. See in this connexion Ridgeway, Early Age of Greece, p. 366. Gruppe, p. 563 f. Jessen in Pauly-Wissowa I 768.

548 [i) i)Trb

Sio/3i£ecr#ai

5 4 8 Schol. Dionys. Per. 10 p. 323, held by the geographers: Strabo 490 T?J 23 AiVx^Xos 8e if Hpo/J.T]dec \\jofj.€V(£ (fr. Si JMpdnrri trvvexqi iariv i] 'Atria /cord rbv I&va'iv avv&TrTovaa. airy, 491 TOV Tavai'v, 197) Kal Zo0OK\ijs if 2KIJ8CUS iiirb roirov (sc. TavaiSos) 5t.opi'<;eada.i. (pricri ras rjirdpovs.tivirep T77S Eupcjinj? Kal TTJS 'Aaias optov iiwedineda, 492 Hpiov vwdKetrai Trjs Eiptiinjs This quotation is printed by Nauck and Kal TTJS 'Acrtcts 6 Tava'ts TT0Ta/x6s. Editors Dindorf in conjunction with fr. 547, but fail to observe that this is the point of has nothing to do with it, and should Hor. Carm. 3. 10. 1 extremum Tanain clearly be separated. si biberes, Lyce. The view that the Tanais was the boundary of Europe and Asia was also

549 re Kal crrjpayya<; 549

A t h e n . 189 c Ka\ov
KLOS TOUS avk&vas,

(Xairep QovKvSLdTjs kv

ry 5' (103) Kal iravTes KaraXoydStiv avyypa
P} pj/ H. refers to Ap. Rhod. 4. 228—235, in which Aeetes, infuriated at the escape of Medea, threatens the Colchians with his

190 dire displeasure if they fail to find her on land or sea. The present fragment contains a description of the places to be searched by the pursuers: ' cliffs and hollows and creeks along the shore.' In Eur. I.T. 106 Pylades proposes to O r e s t e s : Kpvif/u/xev 8e/J.ai \ tear' &rrp' a irbvTos VOTISL SmKhvfei jiieXas, a n d in

v. 262 the herdsman describes the place where they were discovered : rjv TIS Siapp
TToXXt*)

d\

I

X

y was conjectured by Her-

m a n n ; b u t we have no reason to mistrust t h e grammatical tradition. I n Track. 100 J e b b supports irovrias, t h e original reading of L , against irovriovs of A a n d most of the other MSS. Blaydes, taking t h e same view, wished to introduce •i/St iroPTtas here—a needless change. I n Ar. Av. 244 only Y, as corrected, gives eXei'ovs. Cf. Philostr. imag. 2. 6. 1 iv awaX-rj avhuvi.. F o r t h e general sense Abresch compared Verg. Georg. 3. 276

saxa per et scopulos et depressas convalles. For ijW see on fr. 386.

550 dt/»aXa/cros 55O

Hesych. I p. 347 d\fid\aKTos' S, d^T)Xd0»JTOJ, anp&TTJTOS (1. &Kpt>-

and Lat. palpo. Cf. Ar. Lys. 275 dn-^X8t» aipaXaicTos—' came off scot-free'— where the schol. has d7ra0j)s, oTi/tcipTj-ros. This explanation passed into Suid. s.v.,

f as in Phot. inf.). 2KI)#CUS (SO Musuras for cxiBav) ZO^OKXTJS. The who adds &\pd\a.KTOi> yap T 6 S.6IKTOV. meaning is unscathed: see Phot. lex. p. 359, 5 OVK diro^dXa/c-ros • OVK aKpbrijTos oiJTbjs Kpdri/s (fr. 46, 1 143 K.): see also oiS' ippdirio-Tos. Bekk. anecd. p. 475, 31 s.v. diaxf/aXaTTeaBai. Ar. Lys. 84 rprtp &\j/aXKaKTOv • &.\j/ii)\d<pr)Tov. Hesych.Upel6v IV TOI fi' biro\l/a\a.o
551 ion' 551

Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. 55,

where the cult of Achilles prevailed from

16 dyiWulbes' KpiQGiv e!5oy, &v [/.^fXvrjTaLthe mouth of the Ister to the Tauric Kal A-pu!TO(pdvris (Eq. 119) nal Chersonese, and particularly in connexion

Hesych. T p. 344 dxiXXeiw

(x

c o d . ) ' Iinr€U(rcv 'ApL(TTO(pdvr]s Kal 'ZofpoKKrjs 2/ci}0cus dxiXXfiui/ (d^iXXiuj' cod.). [eiVi Se Kal 'AxiXX^ws dp6/j.oi jrepi rair^v rty vTJtrov.] l-vtoi de TCJV \CVKGJV.

Kiister

recognized that the words within brackets belong to the previous gloss, which runs thus: 'Ax^XXeiov irXaKa (Tr. fr. adesp. 202)' TT)V 'Ax'XX^ws vrjaov, ri)v Aei//ri)» y h It is not directly stated, but is surely to be inferred, that the Achillean cakes were made of barley imported to Athens from the north coast of the Euxine,

with the island AevK-fi i and the '»-•••»•>•'•X Spi/ioi: see for the details Escher in Pauly-Wissowa 1 223 f. And perhaps even the gloss XevKuv is not without significance: the white Achillean barley suggested the white island of Achilles. As an argument tending in the same direction it may be added that an allusion to Achillean barley grown in the neighbourhood of the Pontus would be especially appropriate to the scene of the Scythae. dxt-XX-rildes was the name given to the 'Ax/XX«oi Kptfal, and dx'XXeia to the barley meal (aX^ira): see Bekk.

IKYOAI— ZKYPIOI anecd. 474, 7—14. Athen. 114 F. Pherecrates (fr. 130. 4, I 182 K.) also mentions 'AxftXeioi ,uafcu as a part of the abundant fare which was provided for the ancients in the days when Cronos was king (Cratin. fr. 165, 1 64 K.); and Achillean meal was served to those who were entitled to the privilege of alTi)<ns iv TrpvTaveicp (schol. Ar. Eg. 819). It might seem probable therefore that Bekk. anecd. 474, 14 'A^Meioi Kptdal' cu eireXeis should be corrected to evyeveis from the text of schol. Ar. Suid. s.v.

191

Xiffrepov dXeijpou elvai...TCL TQV rpvtpwvJlavaavlav To)i> if/aiard, dXtpira ovra Kara (fr. 329 Schw.), otvq KaliXalip fjiefj.ayfj.iv a ^ dedevpiva. 6fj.oiws Kalrj'AxtXXcla/j.dl'a., ^X o u f f ^ r t ^ clubs i^atperoy. rjs'A^Weta

iXtyero TO &X(pira. It may be suggested by way of explanation that the Achillean cake was honoured as a survival of the primitive diet rather than prized as a luxury. (Tirijai! iv Trpvravelif would naturally retain features derived from its early history (Frazer inJ.P. xiv 147 ff.); and in that case we might compare the 'AxiXXeiwv also has Kptdwv Ka$apG>v Kal spicae adoreae, which the Vestals ground and cooked (W. Warde Fowler, Roman etiyev&v, followed by 'Ax&Xeioi npidai • Festivals, p. 149), and the barley-cakes ai ebreXeis, where Kiister wished to offered in sacrifice at Eleusis (Pausan. 1. restore eiyeveU. But the difficulty would 38. 6). Eustath. //. p. 749, 11 argues in any case remain that the despised that the celebrity of 'Achillean' barleybarley-cake appears to be spoken of as cake is not to be taken as evidence of a dainty by the comic poets. So Eustath. luxury in the heroic age. Od. p . 1445* 55 ftoKei hk T6 &\
552 5 5 2 Hesych. 1 p. 408 fivBlfav • TOVTI- Sophocles. fioi' iv J3D#(£. 2/ci)0ais (so M. Schmidt: |3u()(jjeiv, for to sink a ship, became iTKvOai. cod.). Schow recognized that the fairly common in later Greek. reference intended was to the Scythae of

SKYPIOI The title of this play is generally given as tKvpioi, but twice ^.Kvpiat, by Hesychius. The former is confirmed by CIA II as ^. 992 (Marmor Piraeicum): see Wilamowitz, Anal. Eur. p. 157. Euripides also wrote a 2.Kvpi,oi, the subject of which was undoubtedly the concealment of Achilles by Thetis among the daughters of Lycomedes, and his discovery through the ingenuity of Odysseus, when a deputation was sent from the Achaeans to enquire for him1. Brunck inferred that the 'Zicvpcoc of Sophocles contained the same subject-matter, and evidently thought that the citation of Sophocles by the younger Philostratus (fr. 553), in his description of the scene at Scyros when the envoys arrived from the Greek army, pointed in the same direction. 1

Eur. fr. 682 is decisive.

192 The latter argument is discounted by the fact that the companion picture of Neoptolemus at Scyros immediately follows. Brunck also assigned to Sophocles1 the fragment (Soph. fr. 497 D. = Tr. fr. adesp. 9 N.2) quoted from the 2/cvpioi by Plut. de aud. poet. 13 p. 34 D (cf. de adul. et am. 33 p. 72 E, pseudo-Plut. pro nobil. 21 [VII p. 274 Bern.]) TT/I» Se 777)0? rov 'A^tXXea rov iv %Kvp(p KaOrjfievov iv Tat? irapOevois yeyevqfievrfv iiri'tr\f)^iv

VTTO

rov 'OSuo-crew? av 8', w TO Xafi/irpbv «? diroa-fievvvs yevovs, £aiWt?, apiarov irarpo<; ''EWTJVCDV 7€'y&>? ;

If one could be certain that the lines were written by Sophocles, they would of course be decisive as to the nature of the plot. Brunck found the style suggestive of Sophocles, catching an echo, I suppose, of Phil. 3 and 1284. But that is commonplace (Eur. Med. 405, Hclid. 235, Hel. 942, fr. 231, 2); and no inference can be drawn from the use of (jbw?. Brunck's suggestion met with considerable approval, and Welcker2 reconstructed the play on this basis. He held that fr. 557 was addressed by Diomed to Lycomedes3—inappropriately enough; for what have we to do with the death of Tydeus ? Dindorf and Ahrens followed Brunck, and Nauck agreed; but, while favouring the ascription to Sophocles of the fragment from Plutarch, he nevertheless printed it amongst the adespota. But there have not been wanting critics to take another view. Tyrwhitt4 identified the subject with the departure of Neoptolemus from Scyros in obedience to the summons of Odysseus and Phoenix, who had been despatched to Lycomedes in consequence of the disclosure of Helenus that the co-operation of the son of Achilles was essential to success. In recent years the opinion of Tyrwhitt has been revived by Robert5 and Engelmann6, and I cannot but think that fr. 557 is decisive in its favour. These words, if spoken by Neoptolemus in conversation with Phoenix seem to be exactly in place7; but they have no ascertainable relevance to the story of Achilles and Deidamia. It would follow that Sophocles and Euripides made use of the same title for legends which, though parallel, were entirely distinct from each other; and some might prefer to avoid this conclusion. Yet Euripides did not hesitate to employ the title of Phrynichus' Phoenissae for an entirely different purpose. Engelmann formerly8 identified 1

Barnes had given it to Euripides. pp. 102—107. s So also Hartung. 1 On Anst. poet, p. 149. 5 Bild und Lied, p. 3 4 4 0 . e Archaologische Studien zu den Tragikern, 1900, p. 29 ff.; Zeitschr. f. bildende Kunst, XLIII (1908) 312 ft". 7 See n. in loc. : the affection of Neoptolemus for his father is also brought out in Phil. 350. 8 p. 4^_ 2

IKYPIOI

193

the 2,/cvpiob with the tragedy NeoTrroXe/xo? mentioned in Arist. poet. 23. 1459b 6, a view which he has since abandoned. The fetching of Neoptolemus from Scyros was related in the Little 07r\a

I had: KCU Neo7n"dXe/i.oz> 'OSucrcei'? i/c ^Licvpov dyaycov TO, BiBcoai TO. TOW 7ra.Tpo'?' /cal 'A^tXXet»r avrw (jjavTa^erai

(EGF p. 36). This agrees with Horn. X 308 f. Apollodorus (epit. 5. 11) supplies the reason for the despatch of the envoys, and states that Phoenix was sent with Odysseus. It is important to note that the same account was adopted by Sophocles in Phil. 344. We may perhaps infer from Philostratus (I.e.) that Odysseus remained in the background, and that Phoenix intentionally or by accident was the first to meet the boy. In Quint. 7. 169 ff. Odysseus and Diomedes come to Scyros to fetch Neoptolemus ; and the reason for the innovation appears incidentally. They were the same envoys who had summoned Achilles to take the fatal journey; and the coincidence increased Deidarhia's anxiety for her child, as she lay awake in the night (242 ff.). No doubt in Sophocles also the parting of the boy from his mother was the climax of the action : the archaeological evidence alone, if its relevance were established, would be conclusive. May we not also infer that Sophocles brought the earlier mission within the purview of the characters, that Odysseus felt it as a difficulty in his way, and that the hostility of Lycomedes and Deidamia was aroused by their earlier experience ? That such was the case is at least probable. Although it has sometimes been thought that the story of the bringing-up of Achilles as a girl among the daughters of Lycomedes was of late origin1, it was the subject of a painting by Polygnotus (Pausan. 1. 22. 6) and must have been known to Sophocles as well as to Euripides. The Iliad shows acquaintance with a version according to which Achilles sacked Scyros (I 668), and doubtless received Deidamia as part of the spoil. According to the Little Iliad (fr. 4 K.) this was after the abortive landing in Mysia.

553 553

Philostr. iun. imag. 1 2/cOpos...

•fjv 6 ffeios XorpoicXrjs avefiibdea

ra\ei.

also by Dionys. Perieg. 521 2/c0p6s T' 7jP€/i6e
IIe7r(£/»/0os.

Scyros was described as ' wind-swept' 1 See Gruppe, p. 6691. Bethe, however, believes (Theb. Heldenl. p. 81) that it was to be found in the Cypria.

p. 11.

IO*OKAEOYZ

194

554 yap dvSpas iroXefios aypevew veovs. 5 5 4 Stob. flor. 51. 24 (iv p. 333, 4 Hense) 2O0OKX?JS Sxupiois (S omits the name of the play). '
A.P. 9. 362, 24 ovde AUijv <-\a$ev iravdepKea 0oiVios ivijp | 'EXXdSos afLthaii/ dya/xov (Traxw Kre. In the same way war is said to destroy the noblest: see on fr. 724. But, as war is the special province of the young, so is courage their peculiar virtue: Tyrtae. fr. 8, I5ff, 9, 13175' dpeTi}, rid' &e6\ov iv avOpinroiaui aptarov I KaKKurrbv re
555 r/ TTOvrovavTat TU>V TakanT(iipwv fiporcov, oh ovre haCfjicov ovre r t s dvrjTwv TT\OVTOV TTOT* av veifieiev d^iav XeTrrcus erri poTrf)o~iv euTroXas ua/cpas I

I

•

I I

del TrapappiTTTOi>Te<; ol Tro\v<$>6opoi f) ecra)O"cu> aKepSavav rj SuoXzcrav. 555. 1 ?j SM, om. A 2 di/rjTav F . W. Schmidt: de&v codd. | • Meineke: vep.ti>v codd. 3 vd/ieiev Brunck: velfieiav codd. 4 XETTTJJS vel XeTrnjs codd.: corr. Meineke | eTippoirijiiTiv S, iirippoirijaiv M, iirl poirTJaw A, ^TI piiriaiv Meineke 6 ^s us &r (iSxrav vel ii)7ii>' M) SMA: corr. Porson [ i) KipSavav SMA: corr. Meineke. 555

Stob. flor. 59. 3 (iv p. 400, 10

Hense) SO^OKX&IVS 2Kvpiav.

'y TOVTO-

vavrai... 5twXe.' The sequence of thought is : ' the risks run by seafaring folk in the hope of gain are so great that no reward however rich can compensate them.' 1 TWV TaXaiirupuv pporuv. For the partitive genitive as predicate see KuehnerGerth § 418. 1 (a), Madv. § 51c. But the words are ill adapted to express the thought that seafarers are the most wretched people in the world, since ol TaXtuirwpoi ppoToi includes the whole human race: cf. fr. 945, Aesch. Prom. •247, Eur. Suppl. 734, fr. 196. Still, we can hardly regard as probable such con-

as follows: j TJITTOVTO vavTat T&V TaKanribptov

fivduv: but, as Wecklein remarked, Tokanr&piav is against this view. The simplest solution would be to assume the loss of a line after fiporGiv, containing the idea : HOKUTT' ael TpLflovaiv a$TJ\ov /SI'OK.

Bernhardy unnecessarily suspected the genuineness of the whole fragment (Gr. Litt. II 3 2 p. 334). 2f. The Ms reading must be corrupt, and a contrast between dal/ucv and TIS dewv does not seem likely here: see however Tucker on Aesch. Theb. 510. (1) Enger substituted rixv X&P"' f° r 9e!av vtftwv with irtivwv for x^P'" in the follo.wing line. This view recognizes that a(lav jectures aS
ZKYPIOI

195

tide (H. adds 5' after Xeirrais). Moreover the antithesis of daiiiuv and TVXV requires justification: contrast e.g. Aesch. Ag. 667 ff. (2) F. W. Schmidt read ofre T «

iirl poTTJs ydp; but the dative is correct, as e.g. in Xen. mem. 2. 1. 18 tir' dyaffrj iXirlSi. The thought that the seaman is always close to death—protected by an 9VI\TCIV trbvwi TrXeiffTOif TTOT', following in inch or two of timber—is one of those part the same lines as Enger. But oiire that continually recur in Greek (and the rts QVT)TS>V, thus baldly contrasted, is imitative Latin) literature : Horn. 0 628 a logical anticlimax after daLfioiv : if no rvrObir yhp inrkK davdroto (ptpovrai, Arat. god in the fullness of his power can give phaen. 298 Sklyov Se Sid. £ti\ov &X5' eptiKei, compensation, how should we expect it Anacharsis in Diog. L. 1. 103 jxaBiiv of a mere man? The same remark riTTapas SaKTiiXovs dvai rb 7rdxos TTJS applies to (3) J., who was inclined to veths, roaovTov ^s irXotirov KUV eirl piiros TTWOIS—the avaricious man \inr/p in Aesch. Pers. 253, Eur. Or. would go to sea ' on a mat'—for which 1077.—8ai|xo>v should probably be taken see Eur. fr. 397, Ar. Fac. 699 (Blaydes). strictly; for the Sai/j.oi'es were TrXovToSbTai The word fHiris meant' a fan,' or ' bellows,' (Hes. Op. 125). — For ifkoirov Mekler and had a short penultimate in the oblique ingeniously suggested TT\OV TOV. cases (Ar. Ach. 669, 888): Nauck quoted Herodian TT. 5ixp<S"w, anecd. Ox. i n 4 ff. ' For, whether success or failure p . 299, 10 TO /jL&TQi tcapis Kal pitris ij fj^v attend these poor wretches, they hazard KOWT] <7vvf)8eta eKrelvei, 7} 8£ T&v ''ASrjvaiijiv distant ventures on all too slender a SidXeKTos trvariWei, but strangely thought chance.' The emphasis is on the opening that pnriaiv was none the less admissible. words, which explain why the sailor —The MSS justify the retention of the cannot earn d|ia x&Pls: n e ' s always locative form poTrytnv: see on fr. 659, 9. taking too big a risk. Thus the main —01 -iroXiJcjjOopoL derives its force from stress of the sentence is thrown on the the idiomatic use of (pdeipecdai to express participial clause, as so often happens in the wanderings of storm-tossed or shipGreek: Eur. Hel. 1214, Hclid. i n , wrecked mariners: cf. Eur. Hel. 774 Phoen. 484. There is a good example TTOGOV XP^VOV I WOVTOV 'tvl VIITOIS aAitw in Andoc. 2. 7 KareiirovTi TO. yeyevquiva avTov...jj.7] redvdvat ( ' t o be obliged to

e
id. 766 (n.), and see

Blomfield's glossary on Aesch. Pers. 457. reveal the truth in order to escape death'). To translate, with L. and S., ' braving 'X«irral poiraC, turnings of the scale ruin and danger' is entirely to mistake which a small thing may decide. Cp. the tone of the passage. The adj. is used E u r . Hipp. 1163 dtdopKe jiivTot. <j>S>s iirl with the same intention in Aesch. Prom. (r/MKpas poirrjs (of a man hovering between 660 (of Io) Tas iro\v(p8bpovs rOxas a n d life and death)' (J.). Following this 846 rijs Trohlxpdbpov ir\avqs. and similar phrases, Blaydes conj. \eirTTjs

13—2

IO*OKAEOYZ

196

556 ovSev yap 556

aXyos olov r) iroXkr) £077.

fir) Porson ad Eur. Hec. 1090: f«?j SMA

av0pii>woisp&pos. See however [Pherecr.J 55 Hense) ~Zoas, us eiraxSe's avBpwTroiffiV el, Kal iravraxv \VTTT]pbv.— $-q.' The name of the play is omitted ovStv...otov: cf. Ant. 295 oviev yap by S. dvdp&irouriv olov dpyvpos \ icanbv vd/ua/n.' F. W. Schmidt, and, independently of £/3Xa olov £(TT' d/coi/trcu TWV tirCiv, attractive conjecture, which is supported Lys- 135. Dem. 20. 46 oib~ev yap olov by the evidence of parallel passages, and dKovaai avrou TOV vbpov. Plat. Gorg. the easiness of the change. Cf. Eur. Her. 637 &x@os 5e TO 7%>as alel \ fiapi- 447 C ovhkv oXov TO avrbv ep<arav, c3 2(b1 pov ALTVCLS GKOireXuv \ itri apart Keirai.Kpares, ibid. 481 B. Menand. mon. 745 xaKeirbv TO yijpds eanv

556

Stob.yfor. 116. 28 (IV p. 1043,

557 dXX et jJ.ev T)V Kka.iovcnv

iacrdai

/cat rbv davovra Sa/cpuois 6 xpvcrb<; fjcrcrov Krrjfia TOV /cXatetv av r/v. vvv 8', to yepaie, ravr" avr)vvTa)S ex e t TOV iv Taa> Kpv(f>04vTa irpbs TO (o<; ayew OI yap av iraTTjp ye haxpvaiv d ' av 557.

3 TJTTOV codd.

oi codd. I ye B : re rell.

e's <^>ws. 5 rbv iv Bergk : TOV ixiv SM, TO fitv A 7 eh codd.

6 Kal

5 5 7 Stob.yfor. 124.17 (iv p. 1127, 1 f. The commonplace that tears are 1 Hense)) 2OOKWOUS 4K Sicvpioiv (so S, of no avail to bring the dead back to / p £ i M M, ao<poK.\4ovt \4 life appears first in Horn. Q 550 06 yip TL ao<poKK£ovs ffKvpiuivi UKV7r/)^feis aKaxni^evos i/fos eoio, \ oidt /ur pliiiv A). ' dXV el...eh 8',

IKYPIOI

197

a T&Xaiva, ^L}] V( TOIS dvyvOroLS rpuxov alone; and 7e is often found after yap, TOCOVTOV (n.). For the word see also but always with a word intervening: see Emped. fr. n D. ?« re yap ouddfi' ibvros the examples quoted by Neil on Ar. Eq. aiJiT)xav6i> e<m yeviaBat. | Kal T' iw £%air-p. 196. They will also convince anyone ohtoOai aviivvarov KOX dirvtrrov. The who refers to them that Blaydes's progeneral sense follows Horn, fi 524 06 ydp posal to read %dpiv ye SaKpvojv iraTTjp is Tis wprj^is (&fv<ns schol. Ven.) irAerai quite unnecessary.—Saicpvuv x*Ptv> ' '^ Kpvepoio 76010: cf. Stob. flor. 122. 14 tears would serve,' is like O.C. 443 tirovs 1ib\wv diropaXuiv uibv f-KXaiev' elirbeTos defffiiKpov x&Pl" (J'' s n 0 : s e e a l s o Eur. TLVOS Trpos at)r6c, ws oitdev irpoiipyov iroietHel. 1182, 1254. K\aio)vi 6V ai/rd 7dp rot rouro, ^07;, K\CUW. H. renders as follows: 5 was condemned by Herwerden, Could we but medicine ills by weeping with whom Nauck agrees. It is unfor them, necessary to the sense, and Trpos rb
558 airocTTi, 558

d7rooTi/37js (d7rooTi/3?js Musurus) Brunck : dirarri/?...cod.

eTvai ' to be away from the city,' although 5 5 8 Hesych. I p. 258 in its ultimate analysis d?ro- may have aircHpoiTTjK&s, oif rty abrty rpifiov (TTeifiwv, TOvriffTi (poirQv. 2o(poK\rjs ^Kvpiais been an attribute rather than a preposition, i.e. ' having the city away.' But, so soon (mplais cod.). M. Schmidt conjectured as the proportion d7r67rroXis: airoXis or airo arijiov, which is unlikely. the like was established, a number of other airoomPiis is solitary, i.e. away from words seems to have been formed on the track. Cf. dim^s, of places {O.C. this model, such as dirddeos (fr. 267), 26, At. 657). We must not expect to dirofej'os (O.T. 196), dvbri.iiLOs (ibid. 215), find that all similar compounds follow dir6fj,op<pos (fr. 1022), dirbdearos, diroxpyexactly the same pattern, and it would /uaros (Aesch. Cho. 274), dirbiiovaas, be better if we ceased to speak of them d7r60opos (Wedd on Eur. Or. 163). On as 'active' or 'passive.' The words the other hand, dn-binros, airbdeiirvos, belonging to an apparently homogeneous dw6/XLnnros, dirbfiaxos may have class may have sprung up at different developed otherwise. For times, and may not all have been based on the same analogy. Thus e.g. dwoirroXis &8ri/j.os see fr. 639. (0. T. 1000) seems to imply diro irb\eus

559 avTocrcrvTov Aesch. Eum. 170 has aiJroo-ffi/Tos, aurb5 5 9 Hesych. I p. 328 avrbovTov • KXTJTOS. The -an- is due to the etymology avroKiXevarov. 2O0OK\?}S 2,Kvpiois (dmof o-ei/w (qieu-): see Jebb on Bacchyl. 16. piois cod.). Bekk. attecd. p. 467, 31 (Phryn. fr. 281 de B.) avrbaavTov • avro- 90, and Brugmann, Comf. Gr. I § 489. i\ oiira 2 p \ i

ig8

SOOKAEOYI

560 56O Hesych. I p. 346 a,%i>T)U.a.TOv remarks. (axp-hwTa cod.)- iteiravov. Xo(po«\ijs Elsewhereaxpii(U"-os is applied to per2KV/>(OIS. We might just as well read sons ('needy'). Similar formations are ^ a dSdirava, as M. Schmidt avoSouros, ayivtwcos etc.

561 5 6 1 Hesych. II p. 237: see on fr. 'negligent'; or from eS and iipa = 7 eiiopiAfew' a Kara fr. 116. The grammarians were not far avr'uppcunv • &pa. (1. tibpa) yap 17 povHs. wrong when deriving from (Spa; for ' to Etym. M. p. 401, 37 shows that the take a thing easily' is to show slight meaning of eOapos ('careless') was traced respect towards i t : cf. ei/))0?Js. On the by two paths, either from eiapeiv in the strength of the above evidence Porson sense of ' to be up early,' & ian v\a
SYNAEITTNOI

It has already been remarked in connexion with the ' ^ crvWoyos that a succession of scholars beginning with J. Toup {Epist. crit. p. 133), who was followed by Brunck, Dindorf, and Nauck, identified that play with the tvvSenrvoi. A contributory reason was the title 'A^otwi- avvBec-n-vov recorded by Athenaeus (fr. 565), although there is no doubt that ~2vvBenrvoi, is correct: cf. Athen. 365 B Sioirep Tipes /cal TO ^,ooK\eov<; Bpa/xa Kara TO ovBerepov iin'ypafyet.v d%iov
of the case for identification rested on the assumption, now proved to be erroneous, that the banquet of Tenedos was the occasion of the principal incident included in the 'A^ai&v avXXoyot;. On the other hand, Welcker, followed by Ahrens, Wagner, and Cope (on Arist. rhet. 2. 24. 1401° 17), held that the plays were distinct. He argued (pp. 232—240) that the subject of the ^vvBetirvoi was the same as that of the later books of the Odyssey, in which the disguised Odysseus contrived the overthrow of the suitors, so that fr. 565 was brought into comparison with the conduct of Ctesippus described in v. 299 ff. It is unnecessary to discuss Welcker's 1

Dindorf (Philol. xxx 11-2) was inclined to restore this form.

ZKYPIOI — SYNAEinNOI

199

theory, since the fragment first published by Fredrich (fr. 562), in which Thetis addresses Achilles, upsets it once for all. The nature of the plot is hardly doubtful. We learn from

Arist. rhet. 2. 24. I4OI b 17 r) ec T I ? <j>aL7) TO eVt hel-rrvov /cXrjOijvai, TifiicDTaTov Bta yap TO fit) KKrjOrjvai 6 'A^iXXev? i/u.^viae Tots A ^ a i o t ? ev TeveBro- 0 8' a>? drifict^ofj.evo'; ifirjviaev, crvvefST) Be TOVTO i-rrl TOV firj KXrjdr)vat, Philodem. Trepi opyfjs p. 66 ( Vol. Here. Ox. I 51) 7rapaTre/J,tf>6evTe<; VTTO TWOS ecrTtcoi/TO? wa-rrep 6 %o<^o/cXeous A^iWei)? rj Kara. Tt TOIOVTO Trapo\ilya)pr)6evTe<;, OVTTQ) yap

a8iKr)6ivTe<; \eya>, that in a play of Sophocles Achilles became incensed with the Greeks at Tenedos, considering himself slighted either by not receiving an invitation to a banquet or by the manner of the invitation. The occasion is fixed by the allusion of Proclus, from which it appears that Sophocles derived his material from t h e Cypna (EGF p. 19) : eireiTa KcnaTrXeovaiv elf TeveBov, ical ev(O^ovfj,evo)v avrtov <J>(.XO«T»;T?;? v KdTeXeLtydr) • ical 'A^tXXeu? varepo? icXr/Gels SiacfrepeTcu irpo<; 'Ayafiefivova1. T h e stay at T e n e d o s occurred

immediately before the landing at Ilion, and Philoctetes was bitten by the snake during the same banquet at which Achilles showed his resentment at the lateness of his invitation. It is obvious that the scraps preserved by Plutarch (fr. 566) belong to the play mentioned by Aristotle and Philodemus ; and the title of the ivvBebirvoi strongly suggests that this was the play in question. The extant quotations assist the identification : thus, the address to Odysseus in fr. 567 is a suitable pendant to fr. 566, and the appearance of Thetis as dea ex machina (fr. 562) is almost decisive in conjunction with the rest of the evidence. The banquet at Tenedos must not be identified with the occasion briefly described in Horn. 6 75—82, in spite of the words ev BaiTi OaXeirj: for (1) the quarrel mentioned in the Odyssey took place at a later period of the siege, and (2) the altercation at Tenedos was between Achilles and Agamemnon, not, as in the Odyssey, between Achilles and Odysseus. In reference to the latter point, it is true that Odysseus bandied words with Achilles in the play; but his motive was not to exalt his own achievements. Achilles had threatened to return home, and Odysseus cunningly prevented him from carrying out his threat by suggesting that his real motive was cowardice, and that the alleged slight was a mere pretence. It should be added 1

It has sometimes been supposed that the banquet, which was represented in this

play, is referred to in Cramer anecd. Par. m 55, 23 (schol. Horn. I 168) 0 §oivi\ iraiSaywybs T\V 'AXIXX^WS, i^tkdwv Se eis 6iav rijs crvyKpoT-ticrews TOV Tro\4/j.ov, eKparndr) wapa TOIV Kxa-t-uv (TwetrTiadTJeai. per' avTQv iv rQ Trapa TOS 'A7a^ / ueoi'OS yeyovdrt 5e 1 irv 0 -

200

Z04>0KAE0YI

that Nauck assigns to this controversy Tr. fr. adesp. 35 rjroi (TTpaTev(T€i<; rj fievwv ear) tea/cos.

A question of some difficulty touching the character of the play remains to be considered. How are we to account for the unusual coarseness of fr. 565, and in what relation does it stand to the corresponding passage of Aeschylus (fr. 180)? (1) Naber {Mnein. XI 185) explained the similarity by quoting Quintil. 10. 1. 66 tragoedias primus in lucem Aeschylus protulit, sublimis et gravis et grandiloquus saepe usque ad vitium, sed rudis in plerisque et incompositus: propter quod correct as eius fabulas in certamen deferre posterioribus poetis A thenienses permiserunt, suntque eo modo multi coronati, and concludes that the ZvvSenrvoi, was nothing more than a revised adaptation of the 'OvToXoyoi. This view gained the approval of Nauck and others (see n. on fr. 565), but appears to me altogether incredible; and I am glad to find that it is unhesitatingly rejected both by Wilamowitz and by Wecklein ( Telephosmythus, p. 8)1. But it is strange that those who propounded it did not observe that, since the subject of the 'OaroXoryoi was the relations of Odysseus with the suitors, it could not have been refurbished as a drama depicting the quarrel of Achilles and Agamemnon. Welcker interpreted dcrroXoyoi as the beggars who gathered round the table of the suitors, but Wecklein gives good reasons for referring it to the collection of the bones after the burning of a corpse, and identifies the oaroXoyoi with the relatives of the murdered suitors whose arrival to exact vengeance from Odysseus is related in
See also Weil in Rev. des it. gr. m 342.

lYNAEinNOI

201

the other hand, it is contrary to the character of Sophoclean tragedy to permit the introduction of a deliberate imitation of Aeschylus, and the peculiarities of fr. 565 are in no wise parallel to the casual repetitions referred to in the note on fr. 142, col. ii 24. But the 'XvvSenrvoi, even if technically TpayeoSia, was by no means a tragedy in the modern sense of the word. Its leading motive was trivial enough, and even in the few fragments that remain it is possible to recognize here and there a bantering tone (see frs. 563, 564). We are driven to the conclusion that the 2vvBenrvoi belonged to that class of play of which the Alcestis of Euripides is the only extant specimen, but that the comic element was broader and more pronounced than in the work of Euripides. In such a production it would not be surprising to find a jovial reminiscence of the indignities suffered by Odysseus in the very words which Aeschylus assigned to Odysseus himself. It may be that Sophocles occasionally relaxed the severity of his genius by the composition of a drama cast in a lighter and more cheerful vein, and by such means displayed the bon viveur and darling of Athenian society whom we know otherwise solely by repute: see vit. Soph. 5 (p. li BL), Athen. 604 D. We must add Cic. ep. Quint, fr. 2. 16. 3 2,vi>SeiTri>ov<; So^o/cA-eou?, qitamquam a te actam fabellam video esse festive, nidlo modo probavi1, although its import is not

entirely clear. As against the view of Tyrrell and Nauck that an incident in the camp of Caesar is referred to, must be set the fact that Quintus was at this time largely occupied in writing or adapting tragedies, and used to send them on to Marcus for his approval (I p. 173). We may render therefore: ' I don't care about the %vvhebirvoi of Sophocles, although I perceive that you have treated2 it wittily.' So read the passage confirms the view of the play which has been reached on other grounds. 1 Ribbeck, Rom. Trag. p. 620, takes a similar line, but reads factam {ox actam (after Bucheler). The conclusion recommended may be thought inconsistent with the arguments advanced above (I p. J98), in relation to the composition of the Inachns. The question is not so much whether a tragedy could be substituted for a satyr-play as the fourth member of a tetralogy, for that is decided by the example of the Alcestis % as whether a play characterized by an absence of serious motive could be produced as a tragedy. The 2tvSeiwvoi, in which a satyr-chorus appears to be unsuitable, is an instance which suggests an answer in the affirmative. But the evidence is so fragmentary and the countervailing considerations, to which attention has been directed, are so weighty that we may well hesitate to pronounce judgement. The use of rpayijiSia in Poll. 2. 224, where he may be referring to this play as well as to Aesch. fr. 180, scarcely possesses the importance which has been assigned to it by some critics. The Aeschylean Kdpeipoi (TGF p. 31), which is inferentially described as rpaytpSia in Athen. 428 F, seems to have been largely comic, as Wecklein (I.e. p. r i f.) points out. 2 For ago applied to literary performance cf. Lucr. 1. 138 midta novis verbis praesertim cum sit agendum, Liv. 10. 31 Samnitium bella, qtiae continua per quarhtm iam volumen... agimus.

200KAE0Y2

2O2

562 \17roucra wpovcra ITOVTLOV \opov 562. 1 \diro\jaa schol. Dion. Thr. 2 'SripifiSav upovaa (wpowra anon.) post TT6VTI.OV %opbv habent codd.: corr. Wilamowitz 5 6 2 Anon, irepl Tpbiruv in cod. Athen. words by letting his eye pass from one 1083 (published by C. Fredrich in GGN upovtra to the other. Whether this error was connected,—and if so how—with the 1896, p . 337ff.)ylverai Si avaarpcxpT) Kal mistake made in the order of the words dta Tr\ei6vo)v fJ.epQv rod \6yov, ws irapa in the quotation itself are questions which 2OOKX« iv 2ivi>8dTvoi.s 7) Bint irpbs rbv 'K%CK\ia (pyjal • ' \nrov, for which cf. Phot. lex. wpovaa NrjpijlSav' • TO yap e£>js oiirus earl • p. 260, 13, remains unexplained: Fred•nbvTWv xopbv \nrovaa "NriprilSuv wpovffa. rich regarded it as a marginal gloss incoron fiera TI rod irpbs ad Kal Trap' porated in the text. That a reference to 'HCT«55(JJ. The same extract appears in Hesiod has fallen out seems obvious, but schol. Dionys. Thrac. p. 460, 3 Hilgard, but proceeds as follows after (prjat : \d- it is still possible that pera a4 occurred in v Tov&a fiev irbvTiov x°P& N^pT/iStof wpowa Soph.,—scarcely that it illustrated the 8TI tiera at avn rod wpfis ae (upovaa). Kal anastrophe. irap' 'E.aU>S(p....So Hilgard prints, and he It is reasonable to suppose that Thetis evidently thought that /xera ai originally arrived at the end of the play in order to formed part of the quotation from Soph. compose the feud. Wilamowitz remarked (a' &povaa...ixiTa'!), plausibly enough so that the appearance of a deus ex machina far as concerns the text which he was might be treated as an indication of late editing. But, when the two citations are date, if it were certain that Thetis did compared, it is evident that the scribe of not appear in the Cypria. schol. Dion. Thr. left out a number of

563

pp

j

y^

fi

Kparrjp'- 08' avr^p ov vplu av 4>ayr) OfjOia Kal fiovs ipyaTrjs ipydtjerai. 563.

1 (pvpare Bergk: <popeire cod.

5 6 3 Athen. 686 A rots natal irapaeKeuo^ai Kara rbv So0o/f\^a 6s ei> "Zwp p p y £ fp (see cr. n.) was first suggested by Bergk, who however subsequently abandoned it in favour of the inferior Kopelre. Meineke appears to have made the same correction independently, and it is almost certainly right. 4>opuTt without an object expressed has no meaning and cannot be used absolutely ; nor does the context here suggest an object which might be supplied. On the other hand (pvpare is altogether apt. The reference is to the preparation of a /uafa, which, as distinguished from loaves baked of wheaten meal (aprov wiaauv or

S' avi)p cod.

oirrav), was a lump of barley meal (a\0ira) kneaded together {/idaaa), then dried in a mould, and afterwards without further cooking moistened with water, oil, or wine —or combinations of such liquids—before being eaten. The technical term for the last-mentioned mixture, i.e. the result of the final moistening, was (pvarij or (pipa/ia, and that is the process which Qvpare here describes. Cf. Thuc. 3. 49 ija-0tbv re a/ia e\a6vovT€s olvij) Kal tXaly

S\0iTa Tevpa-

litva. It is possible, as Hermann-Bluemner, Privata.lt. p. 218, observe, that this illustrates Moeris p. 211, 30 (pvarrj irepi(TTU/iivus rb (pipa^a TCIV a\(ptTwi>,tiravfi.})

ytv-qrai juofct, as being a case where there has been no preliminary kneading. It

ZYNAEITTNOI will be observed that
203

to may be either Ajax, Diomedes, or Achilles; and it is of course possible that by 85' avrjp the speaker may intend to describe himself (0. T. 534, etc.).—ofioia Ka£: cf. Plat. Ion 531 D aW ovx dfiolcos 7reironjKa(7i Kal "0/J.iipos. So laa Kal in 0. T. 1187 ws v/*as ?
ivapiB^d, Eur. El. 994 x<"Pe> creplfa a' laa Kal fiaKapat.

F o r the adverbial 5/j.oLa

Schol. Plat. yep. 372 B vt^avra aprocf. T h u c . 7. 29 T6 yap •y&'os rb TSIV OpaKuv iroi'tjffo.vTes, fxd^avTes Si (frvp&ffavTes. Here dfxola rois jUdXiora TOV l3apf3apiKOu, if § we may take it that the process is de- av 8ap(TT]ffT}, (poviK&TaTdv itjTtv.—Povs «pscribed in its double aspect.—h/\elru> is 7arr]S was used by Archilochus (fr. 39). followed by Kparfpa in place of the normal The stall-fed ox became proverbial for reiyxew olvov et's Kparijpa. Cf. Pind. Nem. freshment as a reward of labour: Philostr. 9. 50 iyKi.pva.Tu> TIS jet'" {scil. KpaTTJpa), just imag. 2. 10. 4, describing the murder of as we can readily speak in English of Agamemnon in Homer's words, /3oCs ^7ri 'mixing a bowl,' or 'pouring out a (paTVTj (5535)" TOVTI yap rb /xerd TOVS glass.' irbvovs Kal TOVV Sdirvif. H e r e the application is different: the ox must be kept 2 f. 'This man is like a plough-ox; fed, or he will not work. Porson's o5' he never works until he has eaten well.' avijp 8s was no doubt intended to bring For irplv av with the subjunctive in general the passage into accordance with the suppositions see Goodw. § 645. It has proverb. been suggested that the person referred

564 yeveiov d>Se XPV ^ (f>opovvTa KavTLTraiBa Kal yevei b ld 8 TOV

OVTOL

til

564.

1 Sir}\i
564 A t h e n . 679 A Trepl Civ KOX XotpoK\T)S 'ZvvSe'nrvu (so Casaubon : (rvvdeiirvoi. A, ^ufSeiirvoLS Musurus)
>

irapov. I

3 fiyrpos Nauck : ycurrpds cod

a child. (1) Here, however, it means 'grown up'—no longer a child (so L. and S.). Bekk. anecd. p. 407, 16 diriiraif 6 7rp6(r7jj8os KOX dvdpdirais Kal virtp

TT\V

TOV iraidbs ifluKiav. Lucian Am. 2 crxefibv J. thinks that the words may have been iK Trfs dpTi7rai5os 7]\tKias els roiis 4(pr]l3ovs addressed by Odysseus to the youthful Achilles, with the object of exasperating Kpideis. This shows that dvTiirais denoted the age just below that of the (<prjj3os (i.e. him : cf. fr. 566. 1 8iT)Xuj>€s (5ia\eLu), sleek with un- just below 18). Cf. Polyb. 27. 13. 4, where a person described as dvTirai.8a guents—i.e. long enough to be so anointed Kara TTJV i)\iKlav ovTa—who is sent to —not merely beginning to sprout (J.). Rome for education—is called peipaKiov The reference may be to the archaic and (J.). There is an instructive list of the quasi-oriental dressing of the beard, which words appropriate to the ascending ages prevailed to some extent in the period preserved in Eustath. Od. p. 1788, 53 ff. before the Persian wars (Iwan-Mueller, from the grammarian Alexion. Of the Privatalt? § 54 p. 91); but even later some kind of treatment in the Kovpeiov age intermediate between irah and ?(/>T)(3OS was usual. For <popeti> yiveiov, see on he says: TT]V b*k e^rjs 7]\iKiav ol fxev Trd\fr. 930. Herwerden conj. Si-qpecpis with \rjKa, ol 8e fiotiirai.b'a (Ar. Vesp. [206), oi KOOTL watdtK' dvTiKvqft.i.0. in V. 2.

2 dvTCiratSa. (1) Like a child, Aesch. Eum. 38 Belcraua yap ypavs ovliv, avTlTrats fxh ov'v. In Eur. Andr. 326 Bvyarpbs avrliratdos is one who is little more than

Si dm-lwaiia,

ol Si fieKhiifyrifiov KaKodaiv.

The word is used several times by Plutarch to describe one whom we should call a youth. The most notable case is when it is applied to Scipio Aemilianus,

204

SOOKAEOY£

taking part in the battle of Pydna at the age of 17 (Aem. Paull. 22): see also Philop. 1, Dion 55, Cic. 7, Pomp. 76. J. also suggested, as Tucker independently conjectured, that dvSpbiratSa (fr. 6rg) should be read; but this is unnecessary. —yiva \Uyav: high-born. Eur. Tro. 674 Zvviau ytvu TrAoihVf) re Kavdpela fiiyav, M e n a n d . Epitr. 120 oi TT/XIKOOTOI KOX TOIOVTOI T(p yivei. Moschion fr. 9 5t5£]j vpboBe Kai yivei ftiyas \ "Apyovs buv&UTTji.

Wecklein thinks that the sense requires us to substitute rifv yeveidSa (or waprjlSa) (Telephosmythus, p. 10). 3 (H]Tpos is Nauck's brilliant emendation for yaorpbs: he points out that the same corruption has affected the MSS of Stobaeus in a quotation of Pind. Nem. 6. iff. (eel. 11 p. 121, 20 Wachs.). To be called a mother's child was opprobrious much in the same way as we apply the word 'molly-coddle.' Cf. El. 365 f.

E u r . fr. 1064. 4, where the son s a y s t o his m o t h e r : ' H o v e you, aripyu Si rhv (piaavra TWV ir&vThiv fSporwii I lidXurS'- bplfa TOVTO, KOL ai iJ.ii 86vei • | Kdvov yap ei;t§\a.
Eum. 741, Tyrtae. fr. 11. Thus, byway of honourable salutation or impressive appeal, the fathers name was always m e n t i o n e d : Ael. var. hist. 6. 2 6 '1S.piJ.arlbov TTCUS...trarpbdev odv T6I< vtavlav irpoffeZirov, KvSalviav avrbv 'Oiaipucas, Horn. K 68 irarpbBev CK yeveijs ovop.dfav &vSpa

tKao-Tov, Hdt. 6. 14, Thuc. 7. 69. The sting of the taunt as addressed to Achilles may be judged by the frequency of his description as son of Thetis : Eur. Hec. 388 iraiSa QinSos, Andr. 108 Trews d\iai Qeridos, LA. 208 rbv d Bins Tine, Rhes. 977 'AxiAVa Qindos, I. T. 537 GMSos 8' 6 TTJS NijpJSos &m irats In;

El. 450

TTIITTIP Iw-rrbras Tpt
Kan. 990 with Blaydes's note, and rqiakAaSoOs Com. fr. adesp. 17, i n 401 K. So

have ventured upon a phrase for which no parallel has hitherto been found. We might perhaps compare Pind. Pyth.

E u r . El. 933 ff. KAKCIVOVS arvyQ \ rous 7rcu5as, Herts rod /j£v iLptrevos Trarpbs | OOK tbv6fia
4. 99 ris dv&p&iroiv
Clytaemnestra's words in the same play

Campbell wrongly understood yaarpbs

—0$ fxiv elffiv apatvwv, | ol1 5' av <j>cKovfft •wcuSa as 'his belly's heir,' and was even infTepas ixSXKov irarp6s {[ 103 f.)—are coninclined to explain SojAi^s as ' smeared ceived in an entirely different spirit. Cf. with viands.'

565 ak\' dfji<j)l dv/xo) TT]V KaKocrfAOV ovpdvrjv ippuxpev ovS" rjfxapTe1 irepl S' eynoJ Koipa KaTcLyvvrai TO rev^os ov /xvpov irveov S' ov CX.r)<; OCTJLITJS VTTO. 565 A t h e n . 17 c T(OV 5' aXKwv TrotyjTthv ^viot rds Kad' CLVTOVS 7roXureXe/as Kai paOv/iias dvewefiTov (is otffas Kai Kara, rd TpuiKd. AltrxvXos yovv dwpeirws wov •n-apdyei fieffiovras Totis "EWijvas us Kai rds dfiLSas dXX^Xois irepiKarayvijvcu. X^ei yovv (fr. 180) • b'S' eojiv Ss TTOT' d/j.ip' 4/j.ol j3^Xos yekUToiroibv, TTJV KdKoa/j.ov oipdvqv Zppiipep oib' rjfiapre- irepl 5' i-jup Kdpa irXriyeia' ivavayyirev baTpaKOVjiivi], XW/)is fivpypSiv revxtwv irveoixr e/jujt.

Kai 2O^)OKX^S 5e ev 'Axaidi

q

' dXX'... f/7ro.' Eustathius Od. p. 1828, 30 also quotes the passage on the authority of Athenaeus. For the allusion in Pollux

2. 224

T) rpayifbia

TTJV dfilSa

oipdvr)v eicdX«re see p. 201. The verses of Aeschylus are taken from the 'OtrroXbyoi, a satyr-play probably belonging to the same tetralogy as the UriveKbTi). The speaker in Aeschylus seems to have been Odysseus (Tzetzes on Lycophr. 778): and the offender—6 j)i\pas

ZYNAEITTNOI —was one of the drunken suitors, perhaps Ctesippus (Wecklein). In fr. 179 Euryrnachus is mentioned by name, and his insults (doubtless to Odysseus) are described. The plagiarism of Sophocles and the reproduction from Aeschylus of a line and a half verbatim are very remarkable; and it would not be easy to find a parallel in the existing remains of Greek tragedy. Schweighauser, in a valuable note on Athenaeus (vol. VI p. 143), quotes several instances where whole lines are incorporated bodily into his own work by a later writer; but the pertinent examples are confined to comedy. Such are the cases of Eubulus and Alexis (Athen. 25 F), of Antiphanes and Eriphas (84 BC), and of Antiphanes and Epicrates (262 CD). The imitation of Eur. fr. 385 by Agathon and Theodectes (Athen. 454 B—F) is not analogous : still less that of Theognis by Theophilus (Athen. 560 A). Thus it appears that direct copying was practised more commonly in comedy than in tragedy ; and possibly something of the same licence attached to all plays of the less severe type. At any rate the passage certainly does not prove that Sophocles ' adapted' the '0
205

ductory Note (p. 201). 1 dfj-ijA 6v|i<j>, in passion (prae ira). So E u r . Or. 825 9a.v6.rov &n irdSei, Apoll. Rhod. 2. 96 6 5' a/JL' SSuvr] yvvi; jjpnre. irepi is somewhat more common : see e.g. Aesch. Cho. 35. The construction plainly points back to the adverbial origin of the preposition. 2 Kapa: for the form see Jebb on O.C. 564.' 3 ov pipov irve'ov. H , commenting

on Aesch. .4g. 1311 ov Xipiov ay\aio'/J.a. Sw/xatriv Afyeis, quotes Ar. Ran. 1150 Aidwee, Trivets olvov oiK dvdoS Traidas ^TVTTTOV KO.1 rd.s

td

d

566 OA.

jj

TO. Tpoias elcropcov

Se'Sot/ca? ; AX. OA.

ou TO /AT) K\vet,v eywS aXk' eyyus "E/crwp ecrrtv ov [xiveiv KOKOV.

566. 4 oi fxeveiv vulgo : 8v/i reperiuntur

, 6vKaiveiv, oi Kaiveip apud Plut. codices quoque

parody of the Mijus, and of the threat 5 6 6 Plut. quomodo adul. 36 p. 74 A of Achilles in I 356. See Introductory o irapa itOtpoKkei rhv AxtXX^a irapo^vvojv i Odvo~o~evs o& (p~Tjo~iv opyifeo'dai dta rb det-Note. H. renders thus : OD. Already, at the sight of builded irvov, dXX1 '17^17' tprjcri 'TO, Tpotas...84Troy, doiKas,' Kal irpbs ravra ir&Xiv rod'AXIXX^OJS Art thou afraid?... dtayavaKTOvvros Kal aTroirXelv X&yovros OD. I know ' €y$d'...Ka\6v.' What thou dost shrink from,—not Toup was the first who recognized that from ill report, this passage belongs to the Xv'vo'ei.Trvoi : But Hector is at hand,—no time the cause assigned to Achilles' anger to stay ! (which Wyttenbach did not understand) 1 suropiiv. The scene of the play is sufficient to fix the reference. Weckwas Tenedos, an island not more than lein, who adopts dv^alveiv, finds here a

IOOKAEOYI

2O6

TI tprfaeis irpbs TOP iralSa rbv aavrov; ri T% yvvaiitl 5<5fei5 elvai fiekTiwv dirtily, xal T\ \tyo> 'SiKvpov $i ywatKa; dUi ri (p-fiaovaiv oi T p u e i ; ap' od eijyeiv ire (po^oifjievov, opQpTa ovSeptav o-wnjpiav iav

five miles distant from the west coast of the Troad.—ISuXia, dwellings, as in El. '3933 TO |ii] KXVCIV follows the negative verb QeiyeisCf. O.C. 1740 KOX ir&pos ave
KanQs. See Goodw. § 811. 4 Nauck adopts Bvpaiveiv, originally recommended by Valckenaer on Phoen. p. 312, but rejected by Brunck and Dindorf. H. supports oi jxivew by quoting Aristid. n p. 434 (a speech of Odysseus to Achilles based on the ninth book of the Iliad) rL S' larai aoi TOV TT\OV TO axvpa »' ...Ka\bv 6^ rrj Xiajptp vvv irpoaxeXv. KO.1

pivys; Wyttenbach had already noticed this point of agreement, but thought that ffvpaivetv might equally well be defended by p . 437 ir&vTUS Se (sc. "EKTO>P X^yei) oidt T6V A&pSavov rbv eavrov irpbyovov oiSiv elvai x e ^P w T°v AiaxoO TOV aou, v£ Te o~K7)irTe
auToc oppwSe'iv. Tucker proposed avpfialvetv (C.K. XVII 190).

567 a>

irpdcrcroiv, a>s 6 Sicru«/»os

ev aoL iravra x&> p^rpos 567. 567

TTOXVS

irartfp.

2 iravTa xui G (coniecerant Vater et Conington): iravTa-xov

Schol. Soph. Ai. 190 TOV j ^B l S\

Kal iv "2tvvdelirv

lycus, &s AvBptbirovs ixixao-To

KXeirrocriVj;

6' 8pK

For the story that Anticlea was with child by Sisyphus before she came to Laertes see Jebb on Phil. 417. Now irovripois el Tpv(pwvTes iv TOIS aWorptois that G (see cr. n.) confirms Vater's conbir/xyov i$^\ovo-iv, efr' airoSbvTes, iv TOIS jecture, we need not consider such suggestions as Nauck's 'Siavipos iraT-qp in v. 1 {•7TiTr]8etois yeypAtf/ovTcu. d \ \ ' oib" Airoand pTjTpbs wbais in v. 2 (modified by \isKii) Ttp Trdinrip Tip crtfj TOOT' &V rjpKeuev Wecklein to navra KOV), or Weil's icpwrbs elireiv, etvep id\u KXOTTTJS, ' d7ro8idu/u • Kopifetrde ra (p&pia.' T h e genealogy is: for n-qrpbs. Besides, the allusion to Auto- Kopi; Hermes—Chione

I

Autolycus—Amphithea

I

I

Aesimus

Anticlea—Sisyphus (Laertes)

Sinon According to one form of the story, as told by the scholiast on the Ajax, Autolycus, having been outwitted by Sisyphus in knavery, gave his daughter to the latter in order to conciliate him. The relationship to Sinon, another trickster, is attested by Lycophr. 344. (See p.

182.) 1 f. iravTa jirpav bears the innuendo of TTOPOD^OS, capable of every (evil) deed. Cf. Apollod. fr. 13, 8 ( i n 2 9 1 K . ) Trp6.TTOV
TT\V yap

a.lo~xti-

vriv irdXai, \ vaaav dTroXoiX^/cacri. Blaydes conjectures w T&V ai TrpAaauiv, which is

Odysseus unnecessary, but agrees with fr. 189 i! irav ai

Tohp-qaaaa..

The

phraseology

varies : cf. O. C. 761 w TT&VTO. TO\>J.WV, Ar.

Nub. 375, J 5 7 . 6 I 5 xwpfii/ ftc ei's vav gpyov, T r . fr. adesp. 4 TOD TT&V SpQvros )( TOV

SiKaiov. But irdvra iroieiv etc. are not necessarily used in a bad sense: see on Eur. Hclid. 841, and add O.T. 145, 265. The combination of iroXvs and irdvTa is awkward, but not necessarily illogical: 'how much you resemble Sisyphus always' or 'in every case' ('Thou meddling knave, how plain the Sisyphus | shows in thee always, and thy mother's father!' H.).

ZYNAEirTNOI

207

Jebb has pointed out (on O.T. 47;) that

of TOV avSpa. in C. R. XV at p. 394; but the adverbial iravra is very frequent in it is more likely that the article has its Sophocles after verbs as well as adjecordinary force.—ev8i)\os. Blaydes pretives : Ant. 640 yvti)/j,Tjs irarpi^as iravr' fers eiib-qkos, and the words are easily 6W0ee eor&vau. The adverbial iroMs is confused; but there is nothing against likeEur. Bacch. 300 Srav yap 6ffebsh TO tvSifkos, which occurs in Ant. 405.
568 Xd$a

crrvyepa

jp

dvarois j f dve^ovcra fiiov fipa^vv 568. 1 Iliepio-i Grotius 2 Kavrtparos (Kavipaaros Grotius) J-: KO.1 avaparos SMA, Kal avdperos Trine, /cat dvdpatos Heath, /cat axdptros Herwerden, /cat dvdpearos Voss, Kdvdparos Schneidewin | i3 Svvaais Buecheler: wSvvdireis codd., a Se pvaffTis (fivdffts Grotius) vulgo 3 Ovaroh Grotius: Bavdrois codd. | ci7roT/xoTdTa Schneidewin: einroT/MOTaTe codd. clause is contrasted with oblivion, and 5 6 8 Stob. Jlor. 26. 1 (ill 6o9> 6 '\d8a that music is not introduced solely as Hense) the healer of pain. H. suggested that ldb the argument was intended to awake the The sentiment, that oblivion covers ambition of the offended Achilles. achievement in the absence of the record 1 f. For the rhythm of these lines (an of the Muses, is Pindaric: see 01. 10.91 Alcmanic quaternion followed by a paroe6Va>' /ca\a l/jfats doiSds drep \ ...eis'AUa. CTO.0ii.bv I dvrip t/o/Tot are. Neni. 7. 11miac [enhoplic] with catalexis) cf. Soph. rat fjieydXai yap ctX/cai | GKOTOV iroKi'v Ant. H4o(= 1149), 7Vaas I ^eX^ots evTroTfiOTdra dvaTois \ dvsome critics appear to have taken that 4xovua Kri.; and Campbell—indepenview.—KctvrjpaTos. See cr. n. There dently, it would seem—arrived at a is no authority for dvaperos, which L. and similar conclusion. But the necessity S. translate 'slothful.' J.'s emendation for this is avoided, if we recognize that is based on the occurrence of dv4pa
2O8 SffOV OOGOV I tTTiyfl^)

avfyvros, and av-qiceffTos: he refers to his n. on Track. 247. 4 dvi\ova-a /ere.: ' sustaining the narrow pathway of life,' as if it would else be washed away by the pressure of the neighbouring seas (dXtep/rfa 'laff/Jtov Seipida, Pind. Istk. 1. 9). This remarkable figure, which will not bear logical analysis, has no exact parallel in Greek literature, although the contrast of the insignificance of life with the immensity of eternity often appears. Perhaps the best illustration is in Anth. Pal. 7. 472

KaX (TTiyflTJS ct Tt

XaM^Tepov \ fwcpri (rev fur; Te8\if/.pt.frr) KTe. The comparison of time to a ariyix-q is attributed to Simonides (fr. 196). J. recalls ' From the great deep to the great deep he goes,' quoting O.C. 1226 firpai neWev S6evirep i]Ket iro\ii Setirepov d>s T&-

X«rra (n.). See also fr. 572. For the metaphorical use of av^xovaa cf. Pind. Pyth. 2. 88 0ei>v...8s d f ^ t t rirre [ifr rd Kdvav, T6T' avF ertpois | SSUKCV fi^ya KV5OS.—It might be thought that the reference intended was to the shortness of s T 1 life's journey. This is Nauck's view, /ivplos qv, iSvffpwire, xp^""> " 7 ^ °v> &XP irpbs i}G> I rfkdes, x& XOITTOS fivplos tis who would substitute oXfiov for but it is less suitable to dn 'Alorjv. I ris fiotpa fwTJs birokelireTtu, -q

569

name occurs among the Ionian tributaries. He accordingly inferred that a second branch of the same tribe had settled on (os rijs perhaps to be identified with the inhabiTpudSos, UJS'EXXdj'i/fOS kv rots irepl AvSiav tants of Azus or Azes (gen. "Afou), who \4yei (FUG I 61). Suid. s.v, 'Afnurat* constructed wooden images of Athene, Ipuiicbv idvos. Zonar. p. 55. Hesych. I and worshipped them before a sea-voyage. p. 220 'Afifirai" tdvos Tptp&dos is ob- These images resembled the golden figureviously corrupt. heads of the goddess which were fixed on The names 'Afeioi and 'Afei??? are the bows of ships. The Trojan Palladium mentioned on the quota-lists of the triwas originally brought from Azus to the butaries of the Athenian empire under Phrygian king Tros. Such is the subthe division 'E\\ri
Hesych.

I p. 58

'Afeiomu-

570

57O

Schol. Soph. O-C. 10 2 O 0

5£ if Xvfdeiirvcp fitfirikov rov iStdjrfjv ^]

This is repeated in Etym. M. p. 194, 5, where iv OlSliroii is the vulgate, but iv Xvi'SelTri'ip is given by the codd. DPM. The transferred sense of /3^/3T;XOS, corresponding to the ~LzX.profan.us, is found also in Eur. fr. 648 oi yap 84/us fHfrqkov &TTea-$ai Sbiium, and in the Orphic line (fr. 41) de/Sw £vi>eroi
P^pXi,

both quoted by the schol.

The

latter line is alluded to by Plat. Symp. 218 B [Diels, Vorsokr? 475, 1], and by Hor. Carm. 3. 1. 1 and Verg. Aen. 6.

258. Cf. Callim. h. Dem. 3 xaP-o* 0a.ua.ov yvdiniv oiic fa> Sia
has become the exact equivalent of ISidsTJ/S,—'layman' in the wider sense.

lYNAEITTNOI—TANTAAOI

209

571 5 7 1 See on fr. 129. The only safe inference is that Sophocles used the word (jLaa-eX-qs (or /xdcrdXij) in this play, in what sense we cannot tell. Wecklein's ingenious suggestion that /idtrfJXijTas TO/J.OVS is actually the quotation is attractive, but far from certain. In that case we should compare Homer's eurfx-qTOLcnv ifidaiv

(K 567 etc.), El. itf avv 5' l\la
by Bruno Keil (Herm. xxn 645).

TANTAAOI To corroborate the doubtful testimony of fr. 572 in favour of Sophocles having written a play entitled Tantalus, we now have the explicit quotation in the Lexicon Messanense(fr. 573). There is thus no more reason for entertaining a doubt in the case of Sophocles than in relation to the similar citations from Phrynichus (TGF p. 722), Aristias (ib. p. 726), and Aristarchus of Tegea (ib. p. 728). Tantalus, like Sisyphus, is better known for the punishments said to have been inflicted upon him than for the transgression which aroused the divine anger. Various acts of impiety are recorded against him, each having the common characteristic of wanton treachery in his dealings with the gods : the details are conveniently summarized by Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 6564. The accidental preservation of fr. 573, referring to the intervention of Hermes, has probably revealed the version which Sophocles dramatized. See schol. Pind. 01. 1. 91 ol fiev yap avrov (sc. Tantalus) fyacriv vTroKeladai ?,nru\q> TW AvSias opei, , p f | «B? airiav nva p TOP Kvva T?J9 \Lpr)TT}<;, ov 6 Zevs

irapar€Oeifievo<; eirj ra> TavrdXq). Tveipdifievov TOV inrohe^afievov

(fjvXaica rov lepov KareuTTjcre,

TOV Se Ala airoGTeTkab ^p^ijv TOV Be fidX^ov -tyevhoixev

eiriopKijaai,, ft>9 OVK OVTOS Trap avrw TOV KVVOS • Kal OUT&>

TOV A t a eTTideivai /ear' avTov 'ZITTVK.OV TO opo<;, oirep eaTi TOP \i6ov.

The errand of Hermes and his recovery of the golden dog are also related in schol. Horn, T 518, v 66, Eustath. Od. p. 1875, 32—35. It is curious that the particular punishment here recorded, that Tantalus was buried under Mt Sipylus, should also fit the language of fr. 572. I have also brought under this title the papyrus fr. 574, which p. 11.

J

4

210

IO*OKAEOYI

is assigned to Sophocles by the preponderance of critical opinion, but cannot be reconciled with the scheme of the Niobe for reasons given in the Introductory Note to that play (p. 97). The speaker is admitted to be Tantalus, and the scene Sipylus, to which Niobe returned after the death of her children. See Apollod. 3.47 avrr) Se Nto/3^ ©?7y3a9 aTroKtirovaa 777)09 rov irarepa TdvraXov fjKev et'9 %(TTV\OV, icaicei A u ev^afievi] rrjv fiopcjtrjv ei? \180v fi€Te/3a\e, Kal XeiTai Bd-Kpva pi/KTwp Kal /u,ed' rjfj,ipav TOV \L6OV. I t would n o t

be unnatural for the punishment which Tantalus suffered vicariously in the person of his daughter to be described in the play which chronicled his own downfall. It should also be observed that the latter part of the papyrus fragments is especially suitable to Tantalus, as is shown in the notes. The destruction of his royal seat by an earthquake is plainly referred to in fr. 575, 2 ff. Cf. Arist. meteor. 2. 8. 368b 31 r/evo[j.evov o-eurfiov TO. irepl Slirvkov averpairr), Strabo 58. Less

scientific writers record the tradition that a city on Mt Sipylus fell into a chasm and was buried beneath a lake: Pausan. 7. 24. 13, Aristid. I 229 (p. 372 D.). And Tantalus himself, as we have seen, was fabled to have been buried beneath the mountain. To the authorities cited above may be added Asclepiad. fr. 20 {FHG in 305 =schol. Horn. X 582). 572 XOP.

/3IOTT?S \>-h/ yap -ftpovos icrrl Kpv
airavra. 572. 1 chori notam habet S 2 Kpv(p0els S' ivb Grotius : Kpv6ei di %?iv
/3£os 6\lyos earl KOX ffriyfiaios irpbs rbv avupov aluva. Hipparch. Pythag. ap. Stoh.jior. 108. 81 (Diels, Vorsokr? n p. I38> X4> « s *pbs rAv fii/Mrai-Ta aiura (flerdfoxn Ppaxirarov ^xocres ol avBpomoi TOV TSS fwas xpt>"ov KAWUTTOV iv r p /3£ oiovei " v a irapetriSriidav iroa\aovvra.i. iw' evdvfdq. KaTa^idxravres. Cic. Att. 12. r 8 , Catull. 5- 5- The moral drawn is for the mo-t part that of Amphis (cited by H.) fr. 8, ri 238 K . ^iKe, iroifc, ^JJTOS 6 /3£os, 6\lyos O6TI yrj xp6vos,,\ 6 6&t>a.Tos S' dddvards Tlv ^ < & a f o f « s diroBavri. 2 TCSVCUS : see cr. n. Cobet holds that the corruption was caused by the letters re dropping out after -rat, so that GNEHS passed to 0NHTOZ (Coll.

TANTAAOI Crit. p. 192). The Attic scansion was to make the word trisyllabic (-renews Kal Tedvewaa. SigpTjjti&ws Herod. Phiktaer. in Pierson's Morris, p. 449): cf. Ar. Av. 476. For the syncopated form see Rutherford on Babr. 45. 9. Euripides adopts the Homeric scansion in Suppl. 273 (hexam.), where Reiske restored

211

for re Bvarthv. It was for supposing that 8VTIT6S could be used for ' dead' that Croker was trounced by Macaulay in the review of his edition of Boswell. Gomperz (Bruchs/iicie,p. 31) defended 8VIJT6S as merely ' homo,' but in that case the word is singularly illchosen.

573 iSiqXov 573

TtjvSe )(pr)afJLa>Sbv

Lex. Messan. f. 282 V. xfl-

oracular speech in 0. T. 151, 310, 323, and 1440; and also in Eur. Phoen. 23, Suppl. 834.—For the significance of this fr. in reference to the plot see Introductory Note.

aiv (x/>w>>5..i' cod.: corr. Rabe) f p x p HWiS&v a.nv.' 7rap' 8 (ui c o d . : corr. Rabe) Kal xpyvft-uLZia • EvpLirid-qs Aavar].

<|>dTiv.

This word is applied to an

574 .yrjpo \qp .~\ire TS>VS'

Kal 574.

fi.r)V

[ eVet

\i]0ovpye<;

ihe iheiv vdpa,

2 7T vel v legi potest | TiovSeTtfiuvosfpofioii' pap.

5 7 4 These mutilated lines have been deciphered from two pieces of papyrus, which were published as No. c c x m in Oxyr. Pap. II p. 23, and denoted a and b respectively. Each of these pieces contains to the right of the principal fragment very scanty traces of letters in the next column; but nothing of these is legible except Kepau[c6s] in b II. It is possible that a II was placed above b 1; and, if so, the speech extended over three columns, which were perhaps only of moderate length. In any case it is certain that a I (fr. 574) did not immediately precede b 1 (fr. 575), although the size of the interval which separated them cannot be determined. The handwriting, which is assigned to the second century A.D., is of a rough character, and the numerous blunders and misspellings suggest that we have to decipher the copy of a schoolboy. The corruption in the parts of the lines which are preserved is so great that the restoration of the missing letters is rendered unusually difficult, and the true readings can hardly be recovered without radical

3 ijnovurpa eiSrjrepa pap.

alterations. The tragic lines are written on the verso of the papyrus, and the recto is occupied with some accounts which are dated in the first century A. D. The first fragment appears to refer to the fate of Niobe, and it follows that Lydia was the scene of the play from which it came. The speaker was probably Tantalus, who in the other fragment laments the loss of his kingdom, and reflects upon the instability of fortune. Blass inferred that the description of Niobe turned to stone must have come from the JViobe of Aeschylus or Sophocles, and decided in favour of the latter, partly because it is known that Sophocles made Niobe return to Lydia at the end of his play (p. 95), and partly on linguistic grounds. The latter are as follows: (1) In fr. 574, 2 eirei is late in the sentence: cf. Soph. Phil. 1343, Track. 1174 (eireid-fi), 0. T. 801 (6Ve). Nothing similar is found in Aeschylus, but iird is not accepted here by Wecklein. (2) Sophocles has several compounds in which \L8os occurs, and Aeschylus has none. (3) adtvu c. inf. occurs also in 14—2

I04>0KAE0YI

212

euKeX ov

Trj [iev ii<]eivr)<; oTSa

]

d3

jy j x 6dfi^o%- rj yap vvevfA evi d/ca/o]Sioi? TreTpaiCTLv, r) 'JXTTOKLV adevei debs Xi0]a>crcu. TOiyapovv 6[ap]crovvTL JJLOL TTCUSOS /ti]ei' oiKTpa (rvfi
10

4 IKEXOV (iVeAos sec. Cronert) pap. | wirpois pap. 5 Kai/xayovairayas pap. 6 7n)7ds, iV [irqyds- Siiypi? G—H) supplevi | icdXapi pap. 7 vvevfieffa pap. 8 litterae Si non omnino certae, d tamen vix aliter legi potest | TrerpoLcnv pap.: corr, Wecklein | vp.iraKiv oSevei pap. 9 6ap els scripsi: vaifj.o\ov0 pap. (litteram 12 adivoi 5e supplevi 8 inceitam spatium unius litterae ante e sequitur) foy..pap. (vel avTihafav) Ant. 1044, but not in Aeschylus. (4) roiyapovv occurs four times in Sophocles, never in Aeschylus. (5)
1 f. Perhaps avrjp av Traticroficu..., but it is not easy to connect the words in the next line, or to frame a suitable subordinate clause. The general sense might be, ' since god alone "has given me these alarms.' Wecklein, who supposed that a messenger was the speaker, restored eKeivos etire Twvd' iirf][3o\os 6^ttjv. I n that case the following lines contain the speech of Tantalus as reported by the messenger. 3 If. should be compared with the description of Niobe's fate in Ant. 823 ff.— Kwcj>cucru' recalls Horn. 0 54 Kuxprjv yhp 8% 7cua>' deiKlfa fievealviav (imitated by Moschion fr. 7: see esp. v. 5 T6
TANTAAOZ discussed in the n. on Eur. Hclid. 583. Add Quint. 3. 154 K^acrcre Si 0! daKepbv Krjp. Theogn. 977 has the odd phrase KpaSlriv eS 7re£iTO|iiai, which is our slang ' I will give myself a good time.' 9 deupovvri is surely impossible, and Wecklein's bp&vn scarcely suits the data, although the corruption is in any case considerable. I take 8apo-o0vn. to express the earlier confidence of Tantalus in the security of his good fortune: cf. Aesch. fr. 159. The forms with -pp- are sometimes given in our MSS, as in O.C. 491. For the word cf. Isocr. 7. 3 bpQ TUV TT6Xew»...Tas /idWra dappovaaseis irXeiarovs Sti

f

11 f. Grenfell and Hunt restored rb 5' iGTavai. fj.o\6v8'.. deolm fioipwv avrV afoercu fipoToi, but the combination of

213

iaT&vai fi&xas Oeoiffi with iioip&v avria is not altogether satisfactory, and the statement that men shrink from opposing the gods is contradicted by the infatuation of Niobe, who was not a solitary instance of such daring. On the other hand, the proximity of avna^ov- to iJ.oi.puv is surely not accidental, but must point to tioipa XITCUS &TpeirTos, an idea which is illustrated by Headlam on Aesch. Ag. 70. The text is of course incomplete, but might have continued {ex. gr.) irus se&a irpd^ov
575 ] [ ] p f f irov

fioi

Tvpapva

cr/cJ-rjTj-Tpa ; vov SO/JLWV O"U]VTOIJ,OV (T

v]vv

iprjfjLia

]

li>r)\y] \eya> tcr/xat S/>' ev jcrrvx7 ? irdvT^a yap Tpo^ov SLKTJV

5

. T I S KVKXel TUXL 1 ?]

I o

] 575. certum) t vel v

2 tfwpa pap. 3 vK-qTrpovxt-ai. pap. 5 T) incertum | \eyui pap. (X in' 9 a incertum (e legi potest) | rpexov pap. I O ante T fort, vel

575. 1 The connexion of thought may have been represented by dX\' oud' dirXws yap Traidos KTS. 2 For the destruction of the capital of Tantalus see Introductory Note. 6 ff. Ka.K
typical instance of the unexpected overthrow of great prosperity: see Pind. 01. t. 53—58 and Aesch. fr. 159. 9 f- For the Wheel of Fortune cf. fr. 871 6.W ovfibs cue! TTOT/JLOS iv -KVKVI} Seov \ rpoxv
214

IOOKAEOYI TEYKPOZ

As this play is quoted by Aristophanes in the Nudes, it must have been produced before B.C. 423. Ahrens suggested that it might have been prompted by the interest evoked by Cimon's expedition to Cyprus in 450 B.C.; and from the allusion in the Ajax presently to be quoted it might be argued that the Teucer was earlier than that play. There can be little doubt that the subject was the return of Teucer to Salamis from Troy, his repudiation by his father Telamon on account of the death of Ajax, and his departure to Cyprus where he was commanded to found another Salamis (Vellei. Pat. 1. 1). The anger of Telamon is anticipated by Teucer in the Ajax (1007-—1019); and Ribbeck assigns fr. 894 to the Teucer accordingly. It is generally believed that Sophocles was closely followed by Pacuvius, whose Teucer was one of the most famous Roman tragedies, and is several times quoted by Cicero (Ribbeck, p. 224 ff.). There was a famous scene in Pacuvius in which Telamon denounced Teucer for returning without Ajax. From this Cicero quotes four lines in de orat. 2. 193, which also contain a reference to the loss of Eurysaces1. It is a fair inference that these features were reproduced from Sophocles. It is highly probable that Cicero also refers directly to the play of Sophocles : Cic. Tusc. 3. 71 itaque Oileus We apud Sophoclem, qui Telamonem ante de Aiacis morte consolatus esset, is cum audivisset de suo fractus est. Then he quotes a Latin version of the Greek original which is preserved by Stobaeus (fr. 576) and by his MSS referred to the Oedipus*. Cicero's introductory remarks shows that OtSwroSt is probably a corruption of 'OiXel; but there is no play with the latter title, nor was Oileus a likely hero of tragedy. His name was therefore preserved in the source of Stobaeus as the person referred to in the extract, and not as having given his name to the work from which it is quoted. It has also been suggested that he was a character in the At'a? Ao/cpd?, but the circumstances of that play (see I p. 8 ff.) make the supposition unlikely, especially as it would follow that Telamon also appeared in it. Consequently 1 Segregare ads te ausu's aut sine Mo Salaminem ingredi, \ neque paternum. aspectum es veritus, qnom aetate exacta indigent \ liberum lacerasti orbasti exstinxli, neque fratris necis, | neque eius gnati parvi, qui tibi in tutelam est traditus ?—There does not seem to be any evidence throwing light on the fate of Eurysaces, other than that which has been cited in the Introductory Note to the play so entitled (I p. 165). 2 From the fact that Cicero quotes his own translation of Sophocles, Ribbeck inferred that there was no corresponding passage in Pacuvius, but refused to go so far as to deny that Oileus appeared at all in the Latin play.

TEYKPOI

215

it seems that Oileus must have been represented in the Tencer as visiting Telamon and being at hand when the news of the death of the greater Ajax arrived. It was natural that this should precede the intelligence of the storm in which the Locrian Ajax perished; the latter would be given by a survivor, whose ship had escaped from the dispersal and destruction of the fleet1. Much more remarkable is the fact that Odysseus was one of the characters; for his presence at Salamis after the storm involves a departure from the scheme of the Odyssey, which we should not have expected in Sophocles. Whether it was Odysseus who described the storm (fr. 578) and brought to Oileus the news of his son's death cannot be determined; but that he arrived before Teucer, with whom he certainly engaged in altercation, is made probable by the evidence of Aristotle, who alone mentions him in this connexion: rhet. 3. 15. \\\6° 1 KOLVOS 8 dp.^>olv 6 TO avfifidXa \eyeiv, olov iv TW Tev/cpw 6 'O8ucrij' b Be OTL 6 TraTrjp rw Upid/j.q>, 6 Tekafi'ov, ical ore (avTo? add. Roemer) ov TOOV tcaTaaicoTrrov. The meaning is as follows : ' Both accuser and accused can use the topic of signs: thus in the Teticer Odysseus argues that Teucer is friendly to the enemy by reason of his connexion with Priam, whose sister Hesione was his mother; to this Teucer rejoins that his loyalty should be inferred, (1) from the fact that his father Telamon had been Priam's enemy; (2) because, if he had been a traitor, he would have denounced the spies, which he did not.' The second argument appears to refer to the occasion when Odysseus entered Troy in disguise, and was recognized by Helen (Horn. S 242 ff, Eur. Hec. 239 ff., Rhes. 710). It is clear that Teucer was regarded with suspicion by many of the Achaean chieftains (At. 1021 iv Tpoia

he fioi

TTOWOI fiev iyQpol, iravpa 8 w<j)6\tf<Ti/j,a) ; and, if

Odysseus accused him of treachery, it should be remembered that he anticipated a similar charge from Telamon (Ai. 1013 ff. TOV e« 8opo<; yey&Ta iro\efiiov vodov, | TOV 8ei\ia irpohovTa icaL T h e play is again K.aicav8pla \ ere, <^i\raT Ala?, rj 86\obi/cp'iT7)<; 7Tpo? 'Api<7TO(j)S)i'Ta, iirepofievos el trpoSotTj av Tas vavCI(TKOVTO<; Be, eira, elirev, ay /nev v y Apt,&TO(j>u>i' OVK av TrpoBoi,ri<;, iyw 8' wv '\^>ncpdrri^; Aristotle is

introducing the topic according to which a speaker can make an argument directed against himself recoil upon the accuser. 1 For the storm see fr. 578. It is mentioned more than once in the fragments of Pacuvius.

216

SO*OKAEOYI

This, he says, is peculiarly effective, as may be seen in the Teucer. The reference intended was evidently famous, or else Aristotle would have given the details; but to us it is entirely obscure. Cope suggests that the scene between Teucer and Odysseus is again the subject of the allusion; and that Teucer, under accusation of having caused his brother's death, thus rebuts the charge: ' If you, Odysseus, are shocked at such a crime, do you suppose that /, Teucer, could have been guilty of it?' If it is permissible to guess at all, we may well believe that the force of the retort lay in the suggestion that a charge of treachery came ill from one who was the greatest master of cunning (SoXio? 'Opeo-Ti]<; Phil. 608 etc.). The defence of Teucer, when pleading against conviction for having contributed to his brother's death, was so notorious that he was said to have been the first man who was obliged to state his case without leaving his ship, as in the procedure of the court at Phreattys (Pausan. 1. 28. 12). Welcker (p. 194 ff.) uses several of the fragments of Pacuvius towards the reconstruction of the play, and has no hesitation in assigning to it (after Blomfield) Tr. fr. adesp. 569 Tev/cpo<; Be ro^ov ^poSju.ei'o? <$>eihai\.La | virkp rdpvya<;,

—verses which he thinks came from Teucer's own lips. This is hardly more probable than Ribbeck's conjecture,1 that Soph, fr. 894 refers to Telamon; but there is more reason for hesitation in reference to Tr. fr. adesp. 318 TO3 yap «a\&!? irpdacrovTi iraaa 777 7raT/H?. The sentiment was proverbial, and occurs as a senarius in more than one form (Ar. Plut. 1151, Macar. 6. 45); but Cicero's evidence shows that the saying patria est ubicumque est bene {Tusc. 5. 108) was commonly associated with the name of Teucer. It is of course possible that he followed Pacuvius, and that the source of Pacuvius was not Sophocles ; but this is not very likely, in view of the celebrity which attached to the Sophoclean version. In Teucer's case, the words bear an obvious reference to his forced withdrawal to Cyprus; and it is difficult to see in what way the settlement at the Cyprian Salamis could have been introduced into the end.of the play, unless a god appeared and directed Teucer to sail thither, or some intimation through an oracle was given to him concerning the will of the gods2. Such indeed was the tradition, as may be seen from Eur. Hel. 148 e? yr\v ivaXlav Kv-Trpov, ov fi edea-jnaev \ oltcetv 'ATTOWCOV, ovofia vrjaiccTiKov | ^,a\afilva 1

Otfievov rfjs eVet

d

He compares it with Pacuv. fr. v m nos ilium interea proliciendo propitiaturos facul I remur, and infers that Teucer had friends and supporters at Salamis. 2 Cf. Zenob. 5. 74 (Paroem. I 149) irava yrj Trarpis- TOVTO fj.tpos icrrl x p w o O , Sf dceiXex 6 Beds Me\etj> TI£ Yiekaayig irepl oi/oj(reus /MivTevofihiji. The association of the saw with an oracle is worth notice, but of course proves nothing with regard to Teucer.

TEYKPOI

217

iron-pas, and Hor. Cann. 1. 7. 28 certus enim promisit Apollo ambiguam telhire nova Salainina futuram; and it is probable that in this case tradition was followed by Sophocles, even if he was not its original source. The settlement of Teucer in Cyprus was known to Pindar31 2 and Aeschylus ; but it is impossible to say whether Weicker was right in his conjecture that the repudiation by Telamon was one of the incidents recorded in the Nosti.

576 TOV% 8' av fieyicTTOVs KCU cro^xararous Toiovcro loot? av 010s ecrrt vvv ode, /caX-ftis Ka.K<Ss TTpdcrcrovTi, crv/xTrapaivecra?" orav Se haijxu>v avSpbs euri^ous TO wplv •nXdo-Tiyy ipeicrrj TOV /3LOV Trakippoirov, TCL TroXXa (f>pov$a Kal Kakax; elprjfjieva. 576.

1 av B:

av SMA

3

(TV[/.irapaiv4(ras scripsi : avfiirapoiiv^aai.

5 codd.

orav 5' 6 daifjiojv B 5 Tr\&&Tiyy' Lobeck et Ellcndt : /idcn-17' codd. | iraXtpirov ileineke: irahivrpoirov MA, irdXtv rpbirov S 576 Stob. flor. 114. 6 (IV p . 1018, 18 Hense) Zo0o/cA
S has 01). 'TOUS 8'...dp-qixiva.' Cicero gives a Latin version of the passage in fuse. 3-71 Hague Oi/eus ille apud SopAoclem, qui Telamonem anlea de Aiacis morte consolatus essel, is cum audivisset de suo fractus est. de cuius eommutata mentc sic dicilur: nee vero tanta praeditus sapientia tjuisquam est qui aliorum aerumnam dictis adlevans >ion idem, cum forhma mutata inipetum convertat, clade subita frangatur sua, lit ilia ad alias dicta el praecepla excidant. Unless Hense is right in suggesting that a quotation from either Oedipus is lost, Cicero's introductory words prove that the reading OISITTOSL is an error, and that the A

OI of S represents an original 'Oc\ei or 'OiX^us. This in its turn must have descended from a fuller statement, such as is OtXea ahtTTcrai or irepi 'OiAews \4yei rotade : see Introductory Note. It is highly improbable that there was a 1

Nem. 4. 46 f.

2

play entitled Oileus; and Welcker's hypothesis that the lines belong to the Teucer deserves acceptance in the present state of the evidence.—For the general sense of the passage Headlam (J. P. xx 30;;) quoted Aesch. Prom. 279, 351 and T r . fr. adesp. 342 i\aphv irapaive'iv < r < £ > KOLK&S TTiirpayori.

1 av: see cr. n. The same corruption occurs in Eur. Andr. 240, and in all probability in Phil. 572. 3 The infinitive avawapaiueaai. cannot be explained as the text stands in the MSS; and it is generally assumed that xaXws, for which Headlam (J.P- XX 305), Blaydes, and Nauck (Index, p. xm) have independently suggested Seivois, Cobet gave KOKOOS, and Stadtmueller iKavovs, is corrupt. H. quotes Aristid. II 491 detvoi rives eldl fovderGif ertpovs,

iavTovs.

afpfrres

Mimnerm. Trag. fr. 1 (TGF

p. 829) beipol yap dvdpl irdvres eafJ.€v eliKXeeL I £u}i>T(.
aiveaai.

51

He points out that schol. Eur.

Hipp. 921 explains deivbv tro(pnXTT]v el-iras by aX-ydus Ka\bv 8i5acnca\ov eiTras, and

that in Eunap. p. 58 oiSkv y7rocrras Seivbv there is a v.l. icaKbv. Similarly he wished to restore iuvbv 7' I para for p.iyav y' Pers.

p . 191.

218

IO*OKAEOYI

in the opposite direction." But iraXlv(para in Eur. Med. 698, on the strength rpoirov is also correct, marking the reversal of Eur. fr. 850, ib. 1054, Hermesianax offortune.' (J.) In my opinion, Cicero's (Athen. 599 B) 96. But, as Hense reparaphrase is too loose to be of any use marks, Ka\ws is confirmed by v. 6. I in determining the reading of his original, cannot however agree with the last-named and I do not think it likely that he read critic that the inf. depends on olos; for that idiom would require o'lovs to balance /K10T17'. However, irXdanyy' is clearly preferable (cf. Anon, ap Stob. eel. 1.6. 13 the antecedent. The simple correction = Lyr. fr. adesp. 139 KCLI TO re£ wXaiTTiyyt. paKapurTOTaTOP Tcktdtt., in an address to Fortune, Trag. fr. adesp. 179 dvibfi.aXoi which is otherwise pointless: ' the wisest 7rXdori-yyes &
577 ap, evKoyovfuevov L,O)VTOS' r) o

ap

ecratv' 'JLpivvs rjoovais

ev CTKOTO) hrjoovcra /xe

iipeixrixevov.

5 7 7 . 3 X-qBovad p\e Papageorgius : XaBovad p.e vulg. ipu>iis M, l-aaev epivvvs A 5 7 7 Stob. flor. 122. 10 (iv p . 1114, 14 Hense) SO^OKX^OUS Teikpou. ' u s dp' The speaker is Telamon, on hearing of the death of Ajax. H. renders : 'O my son ! What mockery was the joy I had of thee,

4 gaaw' ipwvs S, £
When praised, as though alive ! And all the while 'Twas fawning in the dark, a treacherous Fiend That fooled me with false pleasure !' 1 ap' here and in v. 3 marks surprise that a previous impression has been falsified by the event. When the state or

TEYKPOI action denoted by the verb continues in the present, English idiom generally requires the present indicative: see Gildersleeve, § 220, Starkie on Ar. Vesp. 314. But there is no essential difference between a passage like the present, and the famous cry of Heracles : w T\T)HOV apery, \6yos a/>' yo~d]• ^-yu> de" y e"pyov yj&Kovv • ffb 5' a p ' tSovXeves Tt?x77 ( T r . fr.

adesp. 374). 2 T«pi|>iv: the cognate ace. requires the addition of Kevrjv. See on Eur. Hclid.

219

99°3 cos JCOVTOS, with tTepvbp.rp> : 'thinking that thou wast alive.'—For \rj6ou
'did not disregard the blandishments of hope.'

578 ovpavov S' diro , fipovrr) 8' ippdyrj 578. 578

St' a.o~Tpa.Trr\<;.

1 sq. oipavov (vel ovpavov 8' ?) aTrqarpaipe V

Schol. Ar. Nub. 583 ftwrij d'

ippdyr] 81' affrpawTjs] irapa TO. iv TevKptg 2o<poK\eovs (irapd r y lv 2o0o/cX^ous Tetfjcpijj V) ' ovpavov... daTpairTJs.'

p. 25, n ) agreed in deducing thunder and lightning from the operation of irvevna :

b'rav yap irepL\y]tpdev {sc. TO irvevfia) v££L Traxti piao~df/.evov tKirtari rrj XeTrofxepeia This schol. is not in R. Nauck [Index, teal KOV<J>6TT}TL, rbd' TJ [lev pyj^ts rov tpbtpov, p. XIIl) said ' eppay-r] SC aWepos requiro,'i] 5e 8taaTo\7] irapa TTJV /xeXaviav rod v£ovs rbv 5tavya(T/jLbv airoreXe?. If we and Blaydes approved. But 81' do-Tpoirfis, think of fipovTT) and affrpairT] alike as though difficult, is not manifestly corrupt. Tri'e6fia.Ta, i.e. XeirToixepi) a\hy.aTa, the Thus it might be said either (1) that the

thunder finds an outlet by means of the lightning, or (2) that affTpairr} is conceived as locally extended, as if we could say 'the thunder burst across the flash.' The latter alternative is to be preferred, especially if we take into account the imperfect knowledge of the time. Popular notions of science would then be derived from the speculations of the Ionian physicists; and Anaximander (Diels, Vorsokr? p. 20, 2) and Anaximenes {ibid.

language of Sophocles is more easily intelligible. (3) Starkie's 'thunder mixed with lightning' seems to imply a succession in space or time. This is possible, but seems somewhat forced, if compared with the examples given in Kuehner-Gerth 1 482. The reference is to the storm which scattered the Greek fleet on its return from Troy: see Introductory Note.

579 irayo
Steph. Byz. p. 399, 20 Kvxpetoi

wi/yot (TT6XIS R), wept 2a\a/uva. TevKptp.

2o<poK\i)s

Cychreus (or Cenchreus: Diod. 4. 72), son of Poseidon and Salamis, was an ancient hero-king of Salamis. When Telamon came there as an exile after the death of Phocus, he was welcomed by Cychreus, and ultimately succeeded him on the throne (Apollod. 3. 161).

Legend also connected him with a dragon. Either he was the dragon himself, and actually appeared to the Athenians in this form at the battle of Salamis (Pausan. i. 36.1); or was called Ophis by reason of his cruelty, —a later variation (Arr. Nic. fr. 72 = FHG in -S99)> o r kept it as his familiar (Hesiod fr. 107 Rz.); or slew it with his own hand, and delivered the island from its

220

IOOKAEOYI

depredations (Apollod. I.e., Diod. 4. 72). The island was sometimes called Cychreia after him (Strabo 393: cf. Aesch. Pers. 573 d/cT&s a/upi Kvxpetas). He had a sanctuary at Salamis, and was worshipped there as well as at Athens and Eleusis (Plat. Ties. 10, Sol. 9). It is possible

that there is an echo of Sophocles in Lycophr. 451, where he mentions the cave of Cychreus in connexion with the banishment of Teucer: 6 i*h irarpds ixoiupaiaiv TiXaarpinUvas \ Kvxpeios axrpwv BuKoipov re vaii&Twv.

THAEOZ

Kaibel in Herm. XXIII 268 ff. published from the notes of Ph. Bonarotti a Rhodian inscription dated about 100 B.C. in which the Telephus of Sophocles is apparently mentioned as a satyr-play1. If his reading is correct, Welcker's identification of the Telephus with the Mysians cannot be accepted. The subject is entirely unknown; but the mountains of Arcadia were the best of all scenes for a chorus of satyrs, and the circumstances of Telephus' birth and his subsequent discovery by Heracles provided a suitable setting. As an illustration of the uncertainty of all such speculations, it may be mentioned that VVecklein (Telephosmythiis, p. 22) finds the material of the Telephus in the same passage of Moses Chorenensis {progymn. 3. 3) which Wilamowitz selected as the basis for his reconstruction of Euripides' Aitge. The extract is quoted in full by Nauck, TGF P- 436. Vater {Aleaden, p. 31) conjectured, though for unsatisfactory reasons, that the Telephus was a satyr-play, but there is no probability in his view that the subject was the wounding of Telephus and his subsequent healing by Achilles. The same suggestion was made independently by Thraemer {Pergamos, p. 379), and by Pilling {Teleph. fab. p. 24). These critics could not anticipate that the healing of Telephus would prove to have been a leading feature in the 'A^afcui> <jvWoyo<; (I p. 95). 580 deCpovpos 58O Hesych. 1 p. 53 dei06/>os- detdaXrjS. ^ofponXrjs T-qX^tpc^. &€Lpovpos- aWdX-q. 2O0OK\T;S. This evidence, to which we should perhaps add Etym. M. p. 21, 45 dei-

; t becomes necessary to restore it on p. 89 for af0poupos, as Alberti proposed. Then the second dei0aA/,'s on p. 53 must be deleted (with M. Schmidt); and we

1 See IG x n 1. 125, where Hiller v. Gaertringen follows Kaibel. But the inferences drawn from the stone fragments are considered doubtful by other critics (E. Bethe, Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Theaters, p. 245 f. ; A. Wilhelm, Urkunden, p. 205 fif.).

TEYKPOZ—THPEYS may hold that the lemma dd(ppovpos refers to Ant. 892. But, if that is the right solution, it is a very strange coincidence that detSaXijs should have been foisted in as a gloss to deicppovpos on p. 53, while deupopos on p. 89, jjroperly glossed by dei(?a\?Js, was corrupted to atfppovpos. It is more probable that the solution proposed by Poison (ap. Dobree on Ar. Nub. 518) is correct, viz. that the two glosses on P- 53 should be run together as dfi<j>povpos- del diap:4vwv, dciSaKrjs. 2o0o-

221

K\T)S T^X^y. Cobet was of the same opinion : see N. L. p. 343, Coll. Crit. p. 192. Then deupdpos, which does not occur elsewhere, is merely a diplomatic blunder for ddtppovpos. We must assume that in ae'uppovpos, as often happens (Eur. Phoen. 1 n.), the second member of the compound would tend to lose its distinctive force; and the gloss deitfaXijs is confirmed by Cratin. fr. 98 (1 43 K.) T$ r ' duippovpty p.e\L\d)T(p K&pa TruKd^op.at (T(J5 T' deitpdpq conj. Kock).

THPEYI

Although Thucydides implies (2. 29) that the legend of Tereus was familiar to poetry, no detailed account is in existence which can be traced to an earlier date than the era of Sophocles. In Horn, r 518 ff. the nightingale is the daughter of Pandareos, lamenting her son Itylus, whom she had slain St' afypa&Las. The father of the boy is said to be Zethus. The scholia explain the lines by narratives which have no connexion with the Attic story, as it has become known to us from later sources. In Hes. Op. 568 and Sappho fr. 88 the swallow is called daughter of Pandion, and Aelian (yar. hist. 12. 20) certainly suggests that Hesiod elsewhere (fr. 125 Rz.) referred to the vigil of the nightingale as the consequence of the impious banquet. But the first explicit reference in literature which corresponds in detail with the later story is in Aesch. Suppl. 60 ff., where the nightingale is identified with the wife of Tereus bewailing her son slain by her own hand. Thenceforward the lament of the nightingale for Itys became a commonplace: Ag. 1442, Soph. El. 107, 148, Eur. fr. 773, 23, Rhes. 545 etc. There is remarkably little variation in the complete accounts of the story which have been preserved by the mythographers, so that it is possible to present a narrative drawn from the consensus of the chief authorities. Tereus the Thracian was wedded to Procne daughter of Pandion1, who after a time desired to receive a visit from her sister Philomela, and requested her husband to go to Athens to fetch her. Tereus, however, became enamoured of Philomela, and abused his opportunity by violating her ; but, fearing lest the rumour of his crime should reach the ears of Procne, before leaving her he cut out Philomela's tongue. Philomela then wove an embroidered picture of the outrage which had been inflicted 1• In some authorities the betrothal of Procne is spoken of as a favour bestowed upon Tereus for assistance rendered against Labdacus (Apollod. 3. 193 : cf. Ov. Met. 6. 424).

222

ZOOKAEOY£

upon her, and contrived that it should be conveyed to Procne. When Procne learnt the truth—for Tereus had made excuse that Philomela was dead—she sought out her sister, and, in concert with her and in order to be revenged upon her husband, killed her son Itys, cooked his flesh, and served it as a meal to Tereus. When he had feasted, the sisters discovered the truth to him and took to flight. Tereus, spurning the table from him, and seizing his sword, rushed after them. Then the gods in pity changed Procne into a nightingale and Philomela into a swallow ; and Tereus became a hoopoe. The above features, subject to certain unimportant reservations, are common to Ov. Met. 6. 433—674, Apollod. 3. 193—195, schol. Ar. Av. 212, Conon 31, Liban. narr. 12 p. 1103, Achill. Tat. 5. 5, Eustath. Od. p. 1875, Nonn. 4. 321, 12. 75; and they are brought into connexion with Sophocles by Tzetzes on Hes. Op. 566, who, after briefly stating the chief points' in the story, concludes with the words ypdcjyei Se irepl TOVTOV SCK^OKX?)? iv TO> Tr/pel Bpdfiari. It is well known that certain Latin writers1, including Ovid, owing perhaps to a mistaken etymology, made Philomela the nightingale instead of Procne, and that some of them also represented her as the wife of Tereus (Conington on Verg. Eel. 6. 78). The latter change was a necessary consequence of the former, since it was unnatural to convert the tongueless Philomela into a nightingale. Eustathius makes the confusion even worse by adopting the latter change without the former. Hyginus {fab. 45) alone is responsible for a version differing in certain essential features. In this Tereus pretends that Procne is dead and asks for Philomela to take her place. When his request is granted, an escort is sent with Philomela, but Tereus throws them into the sea. After he had worked his will on Philomela, he entrusted her to Lynceus a Thracian king, whose wife Laethusa, being friendly to Procne, handed over to her the supposed mistress of Tereus. Meanwhile, Tereus had been warned by divination that his son Itys was threatened with danger from a relative. Suspecting that his brother Dryas was plotting against his son, Tereus slew Dryas. The story ends in the usual manner; but Procne, in accordance with the Latin variation already mentioned, becomes the swallow, and— what is much more remarkable, as we shall presently see—Tereus is changed into a hawk (accipiter). Since this version certainly does not proceed from Sophocles, we need not delay over it. There was no justification for Welcker's proposal to incorporate the episode of Dryas, which occurs nowhere else, in his recon1

So also Agatharchides (GGM 1 114, 33).

THPEYZ

223

struction of the present play. Ribbeck {Rom. Trag. p. 35 ff.) conjectured that the version of Hyginus was adopted by Livius Andronicus; it would be more interesting to discover who first propounded it. We have more information about the Tereus than about most of the lost plays of Sophocles. It was probably produced shortly before the Aves of Aristophanes (414 B.C.)1, in which the Hoopoe—formerly Tereus—is a leading character. His appearance excited surprise (99): TO pdya<£o? r)ficv aov yeKoiov <palverai. But he replies that it is all the fault of Sophocles : Toiavra /JL&VTOI 2,ocf)OK\er)<; Xufiaiverai | iv Tat? Tpayathlaiaiv ifj,e rov Trjpea. The schol. explains : iv yap TO3 Ttjpel %0(p0K\rj'i iiroLrjaev avrov a.Tra>pvi0a)fj,ivov zeal Ttjv UpoKvrjv' iv w eatccoyfre woWd rov Tr)pea. Lest any one should be troubled by the concluding clause, it is perhaps worth while to remark that it is only an unintelligent comment on Xvfiaiverai. Some of the commentators suppose that the dress of Epops in the Aves was a caricature of Tereus as he appeared on the tragic stage after his metamorphosis. But Rogers justly remarks that Sophocles 'was far too great an artist to have exhibited the transformation on the stage {tie coram populo.. .in aveni Procne vertatur, Horace, A.P. 185—7), or to have introduced Tereus afterwards in the guise of a hoopoe.' Later in the comedy (280) another eVoi/r appears, and is described: ovroal /j.ev eart, <$>I\OK\€OWS | e£ eiroiros, eyco Be TOVTOV •rraiziro*;. On this the scholiast remarks that Philocles had written a Tereus in the tetralogy Hav$iov!,<;. The innuendo is that Philocles had plagiarized Sophocles, whose play was the earlier: 6 2O0OKXJ}? TTpwTov TOV Trjpea eTTolrjaev, elra

4>tX,0KXJ}?.

Even

Nauck treats this statement as if -irpdorov was irpanos2. However, there is no trace of Aeschylus or Euripides having composed on the subject; and consequently Welcker argued that the important fragment (fr. 304 N.2) quoted from Aeschylus by Aristotle really belonged to Sophocles. Though Tereus is not mentioned, it would not be easy to find any context to which this fragment would be so well adapted as to a description by a messenger of his transformation 3 . Welcker's position has been strengthened by Oder 4 , who pointed out that the earlier form of 1 But Hiller v. Gaertringen (p. 36) makes it earlier than 421, on the ground that Eumolpus in the Erechtheus of Euripides was copied from Sophocles' Tereus. Observe that, if Eur. Her. 1021 f. implies that the Tereus was already in existence, the date would be not later than 420; for the Heracles probably belongs to the years 420—416. 2 ' Inter Graecos primus Sophocles.' Brunck actually printed irpuros, I do not know on what authority. 3 Welcker preferred to suppose that Hermes appeared as dens ex machina. 4 Rh. Mus. XLIII 541. On the same side are Gruppe, p. 924; Bernhardy, Gr. Lit? 11 2 p. 335; Ribbeck, p. 577.

224

IOOKAEOYI

the legend transformed Tereus into a hawk, that this was followed by Aeschylus in the Supplices {japKifKarrov r ar)hovo<;,

63), and that Sophocles' substitution of the hoopoe rests on unimpeachable evidence. It is obvious that the fable of the change of colour and shape in the hoopoe 'is especially well adapted to explain and justify the novelty introduced into the story of Tereus, for whatever reason the hoopoe came to be associated with him. The simplest view to take is that the existence of the popular superstition identifying the two birds was the cause of the alteration in the legend. If the hoopoe was a rare and unfamiliar bird in the fifth century B.C., as Oder argues, there is the less reason to feel surprise at its substitution for the hawk. For, in spite of its appearance, the hoopoe is actually a shy and timid bird, which is scared even by the flight of a passing swallow. Oder also showed that the periphrastic airoZr/Xaxraf e%ei and the use of r/vi/ca were characteristic of Sophocles, and that both are unfamiliar to Aeschylus. Although one is loth to conclude that Aristotle's1 memory was at fault, he has been guilty of a similar error, as Welcker remarks, in attributing Eur. fr. 515, 1 to Sophocles. On the whole, although the scholiast on Aristophanes is not decisive of the chronology, Welcker's case is so strong that I have included the fragment in the remains of this play (fr. 581). The other references to the play of Sophocles are unimportant: Liban. dec/. IV p. 369 f. «aA,cu? dpa ol TpaywSol ravra iSLBaaKov, rov Trjpia, TTJV YlpoKvrjv. Ov. Trist. 2. 389 fecit amor subitas volucres cum paelice regem, \ quaeque suum luget mine quoque mater Itym, following v. 381 ornne genus scripti gravitate

tragoedia vincit. The title was also employed by the comic poets Cantharus, Alexandrides, and Philetaerus; and at Rome the subject was adapted by Livius Andronicus and Accius. The next question is where Sophocles laid the scene of the play. From frs. 582 and 587 it would be natural to conclude that the action took place in Thrace, in agreement with the statements of the majority of the ancient authorities. Thucydides, however, energetically protested (2. 29): 6 fiev ev Aai/Xia T>5? QCOKLSOS VVV KaXov/xevrj'; 777? 6 Trjpevs wicei, TOTS viro ®paica>v ol/cov[ievr)<;, KCL\ TO epyov TO irepl TOV "ITVV

ai yvvalice<; ev rfj
e-Kpa^av.

He was followed by Strabo (423), Pausanias (1. 41. 8, 10. 4. 9), and Conon (31). Welcker and Ribbeck assume that Sophocles agreed with Thucydides; whereas M. Mayer2, holding 1 Dittmeyer holds that the 9th book of the hist. an. is spurious, having been compiled from Theophrastus and other sources at the beginning of the third century. See also Gercke in Pauly-Wissowa 11 1047. 2 Herm. x x v n 491. See also Gruppe, p. 927.

THPEYI

225

that the protest of Thucydides was directed against the present play, conjectures that Sophocles deliberately altered the locality from Daulis to Thrace. Certainly there is no evidence that Sophocles used 'Thracian' in any other than its ordinary sense, and it seems likely that, so far as the poetic tradition was concerned, Thucydides was the innovator rather than Sophocles. That is not to say that he did not know of a local tradition connecting Tereus with Daulis; and the historical question as to the presence of Thracians in southern Greece is another matter altogether1. Anyhow, it is important to remember that the gruesome history was enacted among a rude and savage people (cf. fr. 587); and the terrible revenge exacted by the Athenian women shows the effect upon their character of alien surroundings and barbarous treatment (cf. frs. 583, 584). For Tereus in the character of a fierce barbarian see on fr. 581,3. In this connexion Welcker makes much of the festival on the mountains of the Dionysian trieterica, which Ovid alone- of the authorities records (587 ff.), telling how Procne disguised herself as a bacchant to seek out her sister's hiding-place in the wilds. But there is reason to suppose that the discovery was not effected in exactly the same way by Sophocles. Fr. 595 is of supreme importance as attesting the use made of the embroidered robe ; but it also appears that Philomela employed an intermediary who was acquainted with the details of her story (fr. 588), whereas in Ovid the whole truth is gathered by Procne from the robe. Unless it was covertly smuggled into the palace, some pretext must have been devised to warrant its presentation to Procne. Libanius shows appreciation of this point, by stating that it was sent on the occasion of a festival when it was customary for the Thracian women to make presents to the queen. This may perhaps go back to Sophocles. The other fragments are not of much importance for the elucidation of the plot. Fr. 583 is clearly a lament of Procne for her estrangement from home ties, and suggests that her desire for the presence of Philomela was the original cause in Sophocles, as in Ovid, of all the subsequent troubles. Fr. 584 was probably addressed by Procne to the chorus : Welcker's idea that it followed an invocation of the absent Philomela is less likely. Fr. 585 is the consolation offered to Procne by the chorus, or by Philomela's messenger, after she has learnt of the outrage. For fr. 586 see note in loc. 1

See Kretschmer, Einl. in d. Gesch. d. gr. Sprache, p. 242. Welcker and Ribbeck find it also in Accius. Hiller v. Gaertringen refers to the festival of the 'Aypitivia, when the priest of Dionysus pursued a woman with a drawn sword (Plut. qu. Gr. 38 p. 299 F). 2

P. II.

15

226

IOOKAEOYI

Fr. 582 is, according to Welcker and Ribbeck, the cry of Tereus after his discovery of the women's revenge. Frs. 581 and 589 belong to the announcement of the final destiny of the chief characters, whether this was made by a messenger or by a god. Fr. 590 probably comprised the concluding words of the drama.

581 TOVTOV

8' iiroiTTr)v eiroira

TCOV

avTov

)

Opacrvv Trerpalov opvtv iv y os rjpt jxev (fxxvevTL SicnraXei nrepbv KipKov Xeirdpyov hvo y a p ovv fiopas (fxxvel 7ratSd? r e ^avTOV vrjSvos yu.ias aVo veas 8' OTTCopas rjviK av £av9rj crra^us, CTTLKTT] VIV OLV9L<; OL[Ji,lVa)fA,r)(T€l TTT€pv£aei

oe

jiucrei

TOJVO

air

ahhov

hpvjxov
ei9

TOTTOV

aVoifaei.

581. 4 (j>avh>Ti. Nauck : (paivovrai. A a C a , <j>alvovTi ceteri | Siairahei W . G i l b e r t : dia.Ta.Xket codd. (Sio^dXXei A a C a D a ) 6 Kairov codd. 7 T)VIK &V Zavdrj C a m o t : 'iva. KUTa^avBtj codd., T;WK' e^avBrj Conington 9 ulcrei D a , fiurii C a , a a a a a luaei P A | TOP Sk P E C | air&Xkov E , dffirdXXoi' P , airdXwv A , rovSe IIOXXIJI'TJS TQWOV J o s . Scaliger, TUP Si IIaXX^i'?;s rbwtav Camus, TWJ/5' dTraXXa^els riiruiv coni.

Heath

1O airoiKiet Salmasius: airoiKiau codd., iirolx^Tai Heath

5 8 1 Arist. hist. an. g. 49. 633 s ig 3 6paavepbi> Si on Kal became associated with the name Tereus Aa,Kedat/j,6viot OUT' ftc Qpa^ii/ iv irAratj {rrjpeiv).

Cf. schol. Ar. Av. 102 6 \ey6-

Kal OLKOVTIOLS.. J8{\OKV

av 8iaywvlte
IMVOS Tr)peiis irapa T6 Tqptiv TTJV 'Iti. In Apollod. 3. 195 Tereus pursues the Etym. M. p. 757, 45 T^peiis, 6 rrjpuv ra women with an axe. But this touch may I]SOVT)V ayeipat Swa/xeva, Kal aKpaala ijSo- be connected with the Asiatic version in v&v \e\i)/ip:4vos. schol. Horn, T 518. 3 Kairo8T)X»o-os i\a: for the Sopho4 SiairaXct: to ply the wing, like clean periphrasis see on fr. 489. vu^av urepbv (fr. 941, n n.). The pre-

THPEYI position probably expresses the separate movement of the two pinions. 5 f. 8uo KTS. : 'for he will display two forms coming from a single birth, the

8 f.

227 These lines seem to be echoed in

Aelian nat. an. 3. 26 01 ITTOVCS daw opvl8wv air7}i>4
Kal TOIS ir&yois rols ti^Xois. This himself (ITTOX//). But the expression is so suggests that TWVS' in the text refers to obscure as to be scarcely intelligible. Procne and Philomela, from whom the 7 v«'as oirwpas refers to the early part ?TTOI/' withdraws in loathing, with diro of July, before the extreme heat of the dog-star. Cf. Hes. Op. 597 6/uoq> | patrol'. M. Mayer in Herm. x x v n 492 f. reads davXw eis irTtpbv (v. 4). Cf. Hesych. 111 p. 403 7TTepoc6^os' Tots irrepois vo/j.£>
582 creXas 582

Schol. A Horn. 0 705 iX£ir7roi.s. The Thracian love of horses appears in Homer: iiriroirbXwv QpyKuv N 4, 3 227. Cf. Hes. Op. 505 Si ^iXuis 6 MaKeSuv. QprJKris lirirorpbtpov, Eur. Hec. 9 (plXiirirov \abv evdufojp dopl, 428 0(Xt7T7rois Qpy^i, In the matter of inter-aspiration the 1089 BpTjKTjS eHiirirov 7^1/05. Every one practice of the Greeks was not constant, will remember the horses of Rhesus.— but a medial aspirate is occasionally found irpt'o-pio-Tov, most revered: cf. Aesch. on Attic inscriptions in such words as etiopKos &nd irdpedpos: Meisterhans3, p. 88. Theb. yi"j vpia^urrov ao-rpuv, inf. fr. 605. Bothe proposed atfias for cr^Xos, and The Alexandrian grammarians laid down Blaydes and Nauck were inclined to the rule that the aspirate should be adopt i t ; but the text is free from obwritten only when the word was a true compound, with each member retaining jection. There was a temple of Helios a distinct force; but that if a single on the Thracian Chersonese {CIG add. 2016d), but there does not appear to be notion had resulted, as would occur parmuch evidence of the prevalence of his ticularly in the case of proper names, it cult in Thrace. Possibly the intention should be omitted. Thus they wrote cOatfMav but EyaijUtop, aptpiaXos but Eu- was to classify the Thracians with other barbarian sun-worshippers: see on fr. piiaXos; but there was not a complete 752. Hiller v. Gaertringen thinks that agreement about uiKiJaXos, because some Sophocles described Thracian sun-worthought it a mere synonym of U>KVS. For a full discussion see Thumb, Untersuch. ship after Aeschylus in the Bassarac (TGF p. 9). u. d. Spir. asp., 1889, p. 69; Blass, Pronunciation of ancient Greek, p. 96 E. tr.; /j.ev TTJS yAtX[7r7ros

IS—2

I04>0KAE0YZ

228

583 vvv o ovSev elfjit, ^copts. aAAa TroWa/cts e/3\e\Jja ravrrf rrjv yvvauceiav cf>vai.v, a)? ovSdv icrfjbev. a t vecu [Lev iv Trarpos ^w/xev avdponrcav fiiov

yp orav §' es

i 7raiSas avoia

f

583. 2 Tair-qv A 3 /t^p ^ irarpos Valckenaer: /lev yap Tarpbs SMA, /lev yap iv warpbs B (cod. Paris. 1985), fiiv yap irdpos Scaliger 5 Trdidas F. W. Schmidt: Tr&VTas codd. | i) avoia codd. 6 5' om. SMA, add. A2 | 2fi.
Stob. flor. 68. 19 (iv p. 517,

15 H e n s e )

~Zo<$>OKhiows

Trjpel.

'vvv

§'...

J. renders the whole passage as follows: ' But now, separated from my home (X«p's), I am undone. Often,, indeed, have I observed how miserable my sex is in this respect. When we are girls, our life in our father's house is the sweetest, methinks, that can fall to mortal; for the days of thoughtless childhood are ever glad. But when we come to years of discretion, we are thrust out, and sold in marriage far away from our ancestral gods and from our parents;— some of us to other parts of Hellas, some to barbarians, some into houses where all is strange (a-qdrj), some into places of reproach. And in all this, when once the nuptial night is past, we must acquiesce, and deem that it is well.' I agree with F. W. Schmidt that the tone of these verses recalls Euripides rather than Sophocles, but they should not be rejected in the face of the evidence on mere suspicion. See also I p. 62. 1 ff. These lines are open to suspicion for several reasons: (1) the obscurity of Xa

what similar, and Gomperz thinks it a sufficient defence to refer to DindorPs Lexicon. Cobet, Coll. Crit. p. 193, whose brief comment is ' verba sensu vacua,' writes: vvv 8' oi Slet/j.i ^ ) xP ^ m 5-fi (coll. Eur. fr. 84). F. W. Schmidt and Wecklein,accepting oi dleifu, give vewph and irpwrov (cf. Eur. Med. 292) respectively for xaP^> a n ( i the former also proposes (\//€%a rairy. M. Schmidt conjectured aov 8' for vvv d', and Bergk <J XKwpLs for x°>ph' Herwerden wrote 06 vvv 5 iv rifuv XWP^' with KcLWr} for TavT-rj.

This gives good sense, but is too violent to be probable. Gomperz understood X&v's as privatim, seorsum, i.e. individually rather than as belonging to the class of women. He compares Eur. Hec. 860 Xwpis TOVTO KOV Koivbv (TrpaT^J, but there the contrast is much more clearly expressed. Holzner's rendering ' I am not isolated (or divided) in opinion' (coll. Tr. fr. adesp. 482) is surely impossible. For the general cast of the sentence cf. Eur. Hipp. 375 rjSff TVOT' aXXws VVKTOS iv paKpip xpbvv I Ovrfr&v icpp6vTi.1T' •g 8ii-

ffaprai /3(os.—The loss of «v after \&v and before iraTpos is exactly paralleled in Liban. 1 35- 2 oi fiiv iavrwv iyivovro, = 4
THPEYZ 6eS>v jrarpaxov TOiv re tyvcravTwv ano, at p pep feVous TTJOOS avSpas, at Se fip fiapfidpovs, J p d 8 f hff' i d at 8' ei5 dr)8fj haifxaff', tat 8'8' iirippoda. Kal ravr'' ieiSav ev(f>p6vrj £,ev£r) /xua, iiraiveiv not hoKtlv /caXws

229

10

7 5ie/47ro\oiy/te9a codd. : corr. Valckenaer 1O ariSij Wagner: dX^ft; SMA, d^tf?; B, aTTTjvri vel dfj.efA4>V Kock, ct^ei^ Meineke, d\irpd Schneidewin, aa\evra Jacobs, &K\ripa (vel dyri8TJ) Herwerden, ddr/Xa (vel Haijiia) Holzner, aKTjSfj Rud. Prinz i)S' Mppoda Schneidewin ture (see cr. n.) happily restores the sense. H. well compares the beautiful passage in the Trachiniae (144— 150), where Deianira speaks of her own wedded life, and the words that Ajax addresses to his boy (Ai. 552 ff.), especially iv TCJ (ppovuv

[Nauck conjectured iirippoSa- rd ewpy, which is to beg the question. M. Schmidt also suspected a reference to this passage,

suggesting eirlppoda.- iiripp-qra, iTrl^oya\ * The new home may be uncongenial to the young wife either because it places yap fLT)b€v ijdtiTTQS fiios, | ews TO xaipeiv her a?nong strange surroundings (drjSr)); Kal TO \virtTudai fiddrjs. T h e interpolated or because it has unworthy or discreditline there (TO /i77 cppoveiv yap Kapr' dudiable associations (eirippoda).' But the tjvvov KaKbv) introduces the broader gene- antithesis is false, as Brunck remarked: ralization that ' ignorance is bliss,' for ' quibuscunque moribus sit et qualicunque which see on fr. 86. Brunck's proposal fortuna utatur vir hospes vel barbarus, to substitute dyvoia for dvoia spoils the cui puella nuptum datur, haud secus allusion to childish light-heartedness, but insueta est, quo ducitur, domus.' Campdeserved consideration, so long as Trdvras bell and others quote Eur. Med. 238 is stood in the text.—For the lengthening Kaivd 5' rj6i] Kal vbp*ovs cupiyixev-^v in support of arfdr]; but, as it refers to marriage of the final a in dvoia see Jebb on Phil. 129, and for the use of rpeipa his n. on generally from the woman's point of view, 0. T. 374. it is really against them. Moreover, the word iTrippodos should mean rather abu7 8i.e|jiiro\w|Jie6a, made traffic of, sive, hostile, and it is a far cry to the bought and sold, with did expressing supposed sense flagitiosus, even if the mutuality. But the vb. does not necesword can be used passively. The house sarily imply that the father received intended is that where the new-comer money for parting with his daughter. will meet with nothing but fault-finding It is more likely that Sophocles was and unfriendliness from the inmates. thinking of the Athenian custom of The simplest correction of d\t]ffrj appears providing a dowry, to which Euripides to me to be drjSij, which, as I have since alludes in passages with a similar tone found, has been anticipated by Wagner, to this (Mai. 232, Hipp. 628). Seyffert, Meineke, and Headlam (J.P. 8 fltwv irarpiuwv suggested to an XXIII 272). Thus we get a natural conAthenian his right to participate in the trast : in the one case the wife is offended worship of the phratries, the most im-. by her new surroundings, and in the other portant mark of citizenship : see Plat. her KriSearai will not tolerate her intruEuthyd. 302 B, c. For the use^ in sion. In Trach. 869 d^ijs appears to Sophocles see Jebb on O.C. 756.—airo, be an error for dr/dys (vulg.) or dy-qdris away from, as in dirb da\d(ro~ris (Hdt. 4. (Jebb); and in Eur. Hel.418 I still think 18), dirb -?s d\6x<>(0 (Horn. B 292), and that dydlav should take the place of the like. There is no need for Blaydes's ai}6la.v. Prinz's anyd-i) (communicated to me by Mekler) seems to mean ' ill1O tti]Srj...e7rippo6a: see cr. n. J. kept.' writes : ' ImppoBa, "open to reproach "; l l f . The sentiment is based upon a see on Ant. 4 1 3 ^ fnrippbBois | KaKoiinv. popular maxim: Eur. Tro. 665 Kairoi Tr. 263 iroWd f).iv \6701s | tTTtppbSi)tyt. ti6 ^£ | \eyovaiv ws id' Hesych. II p . 166 iinppbd-qTa- ewitpoya'

Z0*0KAE0YS

230 os

yvvaiicbs els avSpbs X^x - Cf. Track. 149. However that might be, the wife was expected to show unqualified obedience: Eur. El. 1052 yvvaiKa yap XP^I irdvTa.

ffvyx^p^v irbo~ei, j rjTis ippevfjpyjs,—€iraivetv is hardly more than ' t o accept. 1 Cf. Ai. 1401 et/x' iwaivioas TO abv.

584 iroWd ere t,TjkS) y8iou S' el yrjs pr) ireTrelpao-ai £dvr)<;. 584.

2 fiAXurra Brunck: KaXKurra S M A quial : Ar. Ach. 1008 foXiZ )v d GTvyeis 8O.V/M(TT£OI>, KuehnerGerth n 369. Cf. fr. 845.

5 8 4 Stob. flor. 39. 12 (ill p. 724, 5 Hense) SO^OKX^OUS T ^ W S . 'voXXd... iivr\%,'

This and the next fragment are probably taken from a dialogue between Procne and the chorus, as Hartung has suggested. If.
585 dXyeivd, Yipoicvrj, SrjXov TO. Beta 6vn)Tov
aXX' O/AW? fr

5 8 5 Stob. flor. 108. 58 (iv p. 972, 4 priateness of TO Beia, i.e. Se-^Xara (fr. Hense) So<poK\4ovs Type?. ' akyeivd... 650 n.), in this context appears from Phil. tptpety.' The lemma is omitted by S. 1316 &v$ptl>iroL4peiv, 0. C. 1694 For this use see on fr. 631. TO cpipov e/c Beov /taXus (pipeiv xprf, Eur. 2 Ta 8«ia. Nauck proposed r a Ov^ra, Phoen. 382 5« T& TCJV deuiv, ib. but that is demonstrably wrong. There 1763 rets ykp CK deCiv avdyicas Svqrbv is no similarity to fr. 590, but the general &VT0. Set (j>4peu>, Hclid. 618 TO. 6edv (pipe, sense is that of Eur. Hel. 253, for which Aesch. Pers. 296 Ojttws 5' avdyicr] vrj/xovas see on fr. 258. So Eur. Med. 1018 /3/3OTOJS tptpew, I 6eav SiSbvTuv, Soph. KOI)0WS ipei.v, birba' ioSXA. S1S0T 0ebs, r/S' tp£peuiXP:h<">ILopaSTbv evyevri. The approaXtyeivd.

586 iv

Se 7rot/aA.a> dp€i

5 8 6 Herodian TT. /MM\ Xe|. p. 36, 23 Procne hurrying to her sister's side. It (dpos) Kara avaToXty (xarct (rroX-iji' iv is more likely that it refers to the mescod.) irapa So0oKXe? ^ Tjjpe? {AvTeivu cod.) senger's description of Philomela, whom 'dp«.' Pseudosumably Blaydes, who needlessly emends Draco p. 35 ( = Gramm. Herm. p. 444) is elde (or uSe) 7TOIK(X<J) V (pdpei: but I susnot an independent authority. See gepect that the • embroidered robe' was the nerally on fr. 360. garment which Philomela wove to inform her sister (fr. 595). The sequence may Welcker thinks that the line describes

THPEYI have been, ' ( I asked of her) what she was ready enough (to tell); for on the embroideredrobe....' o-irsvSoviravauTijv probably implies a contrast like that of Soph. Phil. 1178 0tXct /UH
231

8 293 H fie (TtrevSovTa KO.1 airbv \ irpvveis; A 73 wrpwe irapos /xenaviav 'ASr/p-qv. Aesch. Prom. 409 bpfiwfiivif /toi rSvd' £0c6v£as X670V. Lucan 1. 291 et ipsi \ in bellum prone tantum tamen addidit irae \ accenditquc ducem, etc.

587 <j>i\dpyvpov fxkv irav TO [idpfiapov

yevos.

5 S T Stob. Jior. 10. 25 (ill p. 414, 3 XiepaGiv /3aa*iXe£as TOV vbfiov, ovra [lev nal Hense) SO0OKX^OUS Tijpel. * (pikapyvpov rots a\Xois Qpq.^1, Xafifiaveiv fjbSXKov 17 ...ytvos.' 8i.56vaL...o6 yap rjv irpa^ai oOdtv, p.T) diddvNo doubt this was spoken with parti- ra Swpa. The Thracian king Polymestor cular reference to the Thracians (fr. 582), killed Polydorus in order to secure the who were distinguished for their cruelty gold which had been entrusted to him : and rapacity : see some good remarks by see Eur. Hec. 710, 774, etc. The words Grote, III p. 437 f. Thucydides describes are very similar to Ant. 1055 TO imvriKbv the avarice of the kings of the Odrysae yv*p irav tpcXdpyvpov ytvos. (1. 97): KarecT-qaavTo yap Touvavrlov rijs

588 Qd.pcre.i- \iyoiv

Ta\y]6e<s ov cr^akfj

irore.

L : trcp&Wri (vel -ij) SMA 5 8 8 Stob. flor. 13. j (ill p. 457, 8 see on fr. 955. Hence Ant. 1195 opdbv Hense)'Zo<poKk4ovsIK Tjjpias (Hense from d\7J0a6\-q ris i
589 dvovi e/cewos' at 8' dvovcrrepco? ert eKeivov rj/jLvvavTO < Trpbs TO > Kaprepov. ocrrt? y a p iv /ca/coicri 6vfx,ci)9e\s /3poTa>v fjiel^ov TrpocraTTTeb rfjs voaov TO dpfjLa.KOV tarpds icrTLV OVK i j 589. 1 avovartpus In Cobet: avoiarep' In S, a.voti
SO^OKAEOYS

232

cr. n.) to supply the gap indicated by the reading of the MSS. T h e phrase occurs in Aesch. Prom. 228 (is oi xar' iaxuv oiSi wpbs rb Kaprepbv \ XP^V S6\<^ Si TOI>S virepe'xoPTas Kparetv. Cf. Phil. 594 irpbs iirx^os Kpdros, Aesch. Ag. 135 (UTT/PI)) fiolpa \aird£ei irpbs rb filaiov, T r . fr. adesp. 496 firj fiovvoiroLei. 7rp6s TO vrtiri&Tepov.

' The sin of Tereus deserved chastisement, but, by chastising it thus, the sisters have "healed evil with evil." There is an allusion to the proverb xaKbv KO.K$ la
etpyaffrcu

..nai eifil TLS 7^X010* larposlii/J.ei>os The scribe's eye was deceived by the /j,ei£ov rb vb(T7jfj.a TTOLU), Pint, cupid. div. homoioteleuton. 4 |u!£ov. C o b e t (Col!- Crit- P- 10 4) 1 p . 523 E tlireiv 7T/)6s TOP irXovroy ojcrirep iarpbv d X d f o c a ' 'TO m order to TT)V vbcrov / j e i f w 7roie? (Com. fr. a d e s p . obtain the meaning ' the remedy is worse 455 III 494 K . ) , ' Eur. fr. 29^2 irpbs TT)V than the disease': but this is practically vbfiov TOL Kai TOV laTpbv XP€^V.1 ISbvT'' the sense given by the text, if we recogd.Kei T&V irpiv 554). The allusion to the proverb menT)fxa.pTt]ixivitiv, where however Jebb holdstioned in the last note is continued. that the gen. does not follow /idfa.

590 XOP.

dvr)TOL (fipovelv x KareiSdras c!>s OVK irXrjv Abbs ovSets TS>V ra/xtas o n XPV

(f>vcriv

TOVTO

59O Stob. flor. 21. 22 (ill p. 589, 3 Hense) TOC avrav (sc. Sophoclis) Type?

proposition is disputable. For the order of the words to be shifted is a common (TOV avTou ayrjpei S, TOU afirov ayfipet A , source of error, as Headlam and others o-otponXtovs ayripei M, OK\{OVS rqpei B have shown; but that BvyToiis 0tWas [cod. Paris. 1985]. M. Schmidt conjecwould be likely to become dvy,TT\v . or that yeve&v might be glossed by (fivv
THPEYI Pind. Pyth. 3. 59 XPV ra eoiKoVa trap j Scunovai/ uaarevi/iei/ Ouarah tppaalv \ yvbvra TO irdp TTOS6S, ol'os eiixh afo-cts, Istk. 4. 16 Bvard BvaroXai. irpirei., fr. 61 oi yap iaff 6'TTIOS TO 6eG>v \ ^ovXevixar' ipevvd- \ tra. fiporiq tppevi- | guards d' dirb

Ttf) avfJ.fj.4Tpojs TCIV birapxbvTOjv

233 airoXaijeLV.

2 KaTfiSoTcxs: for the plural, which is employed Kara. cis ein-fjfiovs a7roppoi/35et /3oas, | dvdpopovea>. Aesch. Pers. 822 i s ovx vvip- with the words 77 TroXXa /3OOTO?S ianv <£eu 8VT)TOV ovra XPV
Xpeiiv.

Trag. fr. adesp. 308 avdpuirov So in Eur. Med. 1415 the usual doxology

ovra bet <j>povuv dvdpwwi.va. Antiphanes is introduced with the variation 7roAAu>p fr. 289 (II 127 K . ) el flejjTOs el, .SeXrurTe, Tafdat Zeiis e'c 'OXi/fury. The notion of

Ov-qTa Kal (ppovu. Hor. Carm. 2. n . 11 Zeus (or the gods) as the only dispenser quid aeternis minorem consiliis animitm of fortune is implicit in Thuc. 6. 78 oi fatigas ? There is a fresh application in yap otbv re TTJS TC €TiBv^.las Kal TTJS rixys Eur. fr. 799 ojairep 5e Qvqrbv KO.1 TO aw/i'

TOV aiTov b[/.oi(*JS ra^ilav

X I fp Aristotie criticizes it as a rule of life:

serve that ra/j-ias as a verbal noun is followed by an indirect question (6'TI %PV TereAeV^cu), just as in Eur. Or. 1324 dXXd

iu avTtf. A merely sophistical refinement appears in [Isocr.] 1. 32 dddvaTa fitv

construction of (pofiou/j-ai. Hence the so-called objective gen. rdv p.eKKbvrwu is a loose genitive of connexion, and the phrase is incomplete without the subordinate clause: cf. Thuc. 1. 61 ^ dyyekia

etfi. N. 10. 7. 11 77 b 32 oi XPV Se Kara TOVS Trapaivovvras dvdpdnrtva
elvai.

dvrjra 5e

yev4
[xoi \
...KXI/OI /3O^K the noun is used with the

TWV Trb\eojv b'n dfpeardo't.

591 ev
1 &
2 ixrjrpbs S ]

T]/ia$ Dindorf: -nixeas codd. [quod tamen silentio negai'e videtur Hense] | a/tipa suspectum 5 sq. post dovXeias lacunam statuit Nauck, io~xev in iax' mutato | drdyKas Brunck: dva.yKT}s codd. v. 2 is sound, the sense is : " T h e human race is one; one day (cp. fr. 583, n ) gave us our common origin from sire and mother." More literally: " O n e J. writes : ' The Thracian Chorus (from the first ar6.aiiJ.ov) sing this ode, in a day brought forth all of us,—one human kind,—from sire and mother." iraTpo's, Dorian strophe, affirming a principle Uranos : (iaTpos, Gaia : from whom was which belonged to the spirit of the born Iapetos, father of Prometheus. (Or Dionysiac cult—the freedom and equality perhaps the reference might be to Deuof men (Welcker, p. 379). If d|i«'pa in 591

Stob.y?w. 86. 12 (=iv p. 706, 4

Hense) 2OOKX?JS "irjpel. dvdyKTjs.

' iv

234

I04>0KAE0YS

calion and Pyrrha.) Cp. Pind. Nem. 6. i might render: ' To some a doom of evil ?c avSpdv, Iv dewv 7&>os' en fuas Si irvto- days is their meat.' {Psalm 42. 3 my tears fiev liarpbi diupdrepoi (since Uranos and have been my meat day and night.)—On Gaia were also parents of Cronos).' [Add the ground that vv. 4—6 ought to correHorn. h. Ap. 335 TIT^K^S re 0eoi, TCI iwb spond metrically with vv. 1—3 Nauck X8ovl vaieTtiovTes | Taprapov djU#l ixtyav, assumed that a lacuna existed after 8ovTQIV e£ftvdpesre 6eoi re, Orph. k.tf.i Ti- XeCas to be filled with such words as iv T7Jves, Yalyfs re Kal Otipavov wy\aa T^KVOL,ai)Xa(s | dXXpTpiais or other metrical equirnxeripijiv irp/ryovot iraripav.] 'But d|i^pa valent. For the same reason he altered is very suspicious. Blaydes conj. ei<j>p6i>alffx&> to &rx'. So H. conjectured roiis (ttnus concubitttspalris et matris). HerBe SovXcia a fvybv werden, dSovd (in the same sense).' Iffx' avayKas after Bacchyl. 11. 72. Gleditsch (Cantica, p. 227), reading The reference to the Titans seems far?£oxos aXXou 2fS\a<jTev in v. 3, makes fetched : the context rather requires the correspondence by continuing here rmGiv identity of our common nature to be ' dXXous 5£ SovXelas KT£. affirmed as the result of all alike being But the sense is complete as the text sprung from a human father and mother. stands, for SouXdas (8ov\las or SotjXtov Eur. fr. 52, 6 iSiov oiSkv taxofiev ixla Blaydes) may well be an adjective qualiSk yovk I r6 T' kiyevis Kal rb dvcryevh. fying dvdyKat; and the metrical assumpMenander fr. 533, 6 (ill 157 K.) oiSev S' £x°v | Kal warpbs Kal fxarpos Is that which Destiny gave; €K fuas I a./u.4pa KTC. Jebb's rendering of !5«{e (l "H^ac. j avairvtoiiev 5' The character of the rhythm resembles For the metre o&x ^avTes iwl l
THPEYS

235

592 XOP.

dXXd TS>V TTOWOJV KOXOIV TI'S X<xpt<;, el KaKofiovXos j l efcrpii/fei TOV evaicova TTKOVTOV ; T<XV yap avdpanrov tfiav

drai Tracrats /JLeTaWdcrcrovcriv 5 9 2 . 3 QpoiiTh eKrptyei Herwerden et Tucker: ippovTls inrptyei codd., (ppovris 4 chori iKSTpi^ei Bergk, (ppovrU avrptyei. Herwerden, eK
6 wpcus

SM : upas A 592 Plut. and. poet. 4 p . 2 r B avriTapadrfaei TroXXa r(ov 2o0o/cX^oi's, &v... Kal 'd\Xd...7rXouTOP ' (vv. i — 3 ) . Stob. Jlor. 9 8 . 45 ( = IV p . 837, 8 Hense) 2oc/>oK\£OVS Ttjpu. ' Tav... wpais ' (vv. 4—6).

Relying on the similarity of meaning as well as on the exact metrical correspondence of the two passages, Bergk conjectured that vv. 1—3 were to be assigned to the Terens, and were antistrophic to vv. 4—6. His view was accepted by Dindorf and Nauck, and the latter printed the lines as if they were consecutive, but with vv. 4—6 standing first. [Bergk's original view was that rav •yap...uipcus followed immediately after £\ry6v 'ia%ev avdyKas (fr. 591), and completed the strophe, and that dXXa T&V...TT\OVTOV was the corresponding portion of the antistrophe.] It is difficult to see how the words dXXa...TrXoCroc, which should contain a qualification of or exception to what precedes, can properly follow a statement that human life is continually shifting to sorrow. If therefore the lines are continuous, I should prefer to suppose that vv. 4—6 came last, explaining the reason why unrighteous prosperity is precarious. The evidence is not conclusive that the two passages are closely connected, still less that they stood originally in immediate proximity to each other. Nevertheless, Bergk's conjecture has a high degree of probability, and it is convenient to print the lines together in view of the similarity of their contents. The leading thought is that Wealth, although not necessarily an evil in itself, is always a source of danger leading to temptation. The reckless want of prudence which is natural to the over-rich

man gives their opportunity to the cunning agents of Destruction, who are waiting to overthrow his prosperity. The extract reads like a familiar echo of Aesch. Ag. 392 ff. oil yap gtTTiv £7raX£is | TT\O6TOV Trpds icbpov avdpl I XaKTivavri jj.^yai> AiKas I [lo}/j.bv ets a(pdvet.av. | /3iarat 5' a T&kaiva Hei.0dj, I irpopotiXov TTCUS Htpepros "Aras:

see Headlam's masterly exposition in Cambridge Praelections, pp. 114—118. But the standpoint of the two poets is different: Sophocles moralizes in a tone of mournful resignation, Aeschylus with the fervour of an inspired preacher. 1 ff. TOV TTOXXIOV KaXuv TLS \ripis : 'what delight is there in (his) high good fortune?' So Eur. Med. 226 oi'xo/mt Se KaX {3Lov I \dpiv

fxede'icra Kardavelv XPTlfa,

and other examples quoted by Blaydes on Ar. Lys. 865. Cf. Aesch. Ag. 362 iroXXwc yap 4a8\wv TTJV b'vqaiv cl\6^T]v.—For wo\\£>v KOKGIII see on fr.

938.—KaKoj3oJuXos

<J>povTis is the opposite of fladelas cj>pov-

riSos aoirripiov in Aesch. Suppl. 412. Its manifestation is the Aeschylean i!/3pis: Emit. 536 Svcraefiias /J.ei> vfipts rAros WS irijfj.us, I €K 5' Liyietas | ippevdv 6 irdcnu L\os Kal Tro\0euKTos o\(3os. T h e moving

self-seeking: spirit is that of arrogant gi g b Pers. 826 pp inrep(ppovT]
oXfiov

eKX^v fiiyav. It is another aspect of the theme that ill-gotten gains are soon spent: see on Eur. Hel. 905, Headlam in fourn. Phil, XXIII 275 f. The distraction of the mind is a sign of impending ruin: Aesch. Suppl. 116, Lys. 6. 22 KairoL TTQS oil dew Tis Tr\v TOVTOV yvwfiTjj/ Siiipdeipev ; ' T h e

sentiment applies to the subject of the play. The guilt of Tereus towards Philomela, and the crime of the avenging

ZO^OKAEOYI

236

ydp, as here (Cobet, N. L. p. 419); but sisters, combined to ruin all three.' (J.) the converse case is far more common —(KTpt<\iti: see cr. n. 'Verse 6 shows (Headlam, On editing Aeschylus, p. i\ 9). that a molossus ( -) is required. (1) 5 f. ITOIKI.\O|UJTI.SES a r a i irr](i.dT(BV, Bergk conj. €Ko-Tpe't|/ci, which might be 'lit. " wily mischiefs of calamity." The taken as in Ar. Nub. 88 ?K<XTpe<]/ov as T&xtVTa rods o~avTov TpbTovs, " turn inside genitive is one of quality, or definition = •r^ifiara <j>tpovo-ai. The Homeric epithet out," completely change. In //. 17. 58 ftbSpov T' £%£ Eur. Hel. 1055 (TWTTjplas CLKOS.—irdo-ais...wpais, ' a t all £K.' (J.) The best conjecture is Tucker's seasons.' ' Burges conj. cuipais ("with iKrptyei (anticipated by Herwerden,Exerc. ever-varying winds of fortune " ) : Lehrs, Crit. p. 23), which I have adopted. Cf. /xeTaWdo-cus, which might be O. T. 428. The possible claim of tKTptipei (cf> and i/< confused : Cobet JV. L. taken with ir^d-rac: "with all forms of calamity." I do not see the need of p. 782), which would be the easiest alemendation.' (J.) teration, must be rejected, enrpeireiv is to turn aside, divert; and, even if the For the metre see on fr. 591. The words would bear the meaning, the idea scheme, which is repeated, is as follows: of diverting wealth which is the source of happiness to a harmful purpose is foreign to the thought. Wealth is not regarded as an instrument to be well or H. rendered, from Nauck's text: ill applied, but as a secure endowment ' For the Life of Man is the sport of which is imperilled by sinful conduct.— sorrowful change; TOV evaiwvcx TTXOOTOV is wealth as the Dark treacherous Harms float round it, necessary condition of prosperity, in itsubtle and strange, selfharmless : Aesch. Pers. 171 Ian. yap TT\OVT6S y' afie/Mpfy, Ag. 477 Kplva b" And seek occasion against him at every hour of the day:— &
593 ov xprj TTOT" avdpdjTTtov fxeyav oXfiov airo/6X.ei//af Tai/vXoiov yap tcra/xeptos 593.

1 sq. dvdpwiroy- Gleditsch | tin /3\i\pai Gleditsch

5 9 3 Porphyr. in Stob. Jlor. 105. 57 meaning ' in some of his writings, in (IV p. 944, 6 Hense) r\ re yap alyeipos, certain passages,' etc.; see C. Q. 11 216, us <paali> SXKOL re Kal nXoiirapxoj (fr. inc.HI 286. Stob. Jlor. 98. 46 ( = iv p. 837, 147 Bernardakis), tpiKowevffijS Kal are\ijs 12 Hense) £v Tavrtp (vid. fr. 592). ' faoi irpbs Kapiroyovlav. 5tb Kal 2o<poK\rjs £v ...'ipirei.' Here again Bergk conjectured Titri (prjalv 'oi xP^I--a'Ir0^°^€l-' F ° r t n e that the parallel extracts belonged to the words iv run Bergk proposed ^c Ti/pei, same chorus. The considerations are and Bernardakis iv Iloiju^iri; but T. W. much the same as in fr. 592, but Bergk's Allen has shown that tv TIVL, li> riai are case is weaker. regular formulae in later Greek with the Iff. The substantial thought is the

THPEYI

237

(f>vXXoL<s TIS aiyeCpov fiiorixv drro/SaXXei. TIS avdpoyTTdv TO KOJT afjuap

TropavvoiV

TO S' es avpiov

at-

f,

ei TVX6v epirei. TIS (0iyXXoi(Tiv Gleditsch, TIS Bergk) scripsi: OOTIS codd. 4 fyrj Wagner | a/xap Blaydes: r/fiap codd. 5 aSto-ra G. Wolff: TISUXTO. codd. 5 sq. rd yap atipLov ws ^s TvtpXbp'epireiGleditsch vanity of riches as measured by the frailty "with thin bark." He remarks that of human life : so Theogn. 72J f. Ta yap " t h i n " or "smooth" generally suit the irepubffia wdvra | XPW"""' ^Xwv oidels fp- compounds of TCIXU- indifferently, and are Xercu eis'Aidecxi. See also on Eur. Phoen. preferable to "long," though this is the 555.—diro|5\«\|/ai, which in classical Greek sense of Tavabs.' But the traditional exis usually accompanied by els or xpos, applanation of Tav6(ftkoios as —' with longpears here to govern a single accusative. stretched b a r k , ' i.e. ' o f tall o r slender The word does not occur elsewhere in growth' (L. and S.) appears to be correct Sophocles. Blaydes conj. &vdp' es TOP here. J. quotes Horn, tj 106 old re tpvWa for avBpiinrav. The text is open to susfj.aKedv7]S alyelpoio, K 5 xo /xa/cpat T ' atyeipoi. picion, but it should be observed that the 4 ff. ' Let a man so live as to provide passive use of dirofiXeTreo'dai in Ar. Reel. best for the happiness of each day ; the 726, the verbal dirbflXeTrTos in Eur. Hec. event of the morrow ever comes unfore355, and the co-ordination with other seen.'—laoi: see cr. n. The Ionic form transitive verbs in Dem. 19. 265 ov\ OTTOJS occurs in El. 157, and O. C. 1213, so that ... KoX&fetP Tj^lOW ToilS TO.VTO. TTOWVVTaS, dXX' it seems unnecessary to change it.—For the collective TIS with jussive verb cf. Eur. dire^Xeirov, e ^ X o u p , eTifxaiv, &p8pas iiyouvTO show that awoffKiiTeiv was tending to bear Hciid.%2-j (n.), Aesch..£«;«. -.^girpbsTaSe TLS TOKeuiv frtfias ei irponwv..laTw, Xen. a transitive force. In late Greek the usage Cy. 3- 3- 6r (Holden). The sentiment is is well established: cf. Philostr. vit. Apoll. 5. 24 irpo'tovTa 8eJ}T! iv 6'X/3oi. Wilamowere required, trpos for WOT' would be the witz well illustrates by referring to the simplest.—Tavu<£\oCou KTC. : ' For short- ev6v/j.ia of Democritus (fr. 189). Tr. fr. lived as the leaves of the slender poplar adesp. 95 Tratrtc de SVTJTOIS j3o(i\ofj.ac irapaLa man sheds his life' (J.). Some allusion veaai \ Tov$7]fj.epov '£r)v 7}8ems.—For T6 to the leaves of the poplar appears to be KOT' a|i.ap cf. Phil. 1089 (Jebb's n.).— necessary, since the lines are only a par- aSia-Ta: see cr. n. For the principles ticular application of the famous simile in governing the restoration of a for 17 in Horn. Z 146. But, inasmuch as dwofiaX- dramatic lyrics see Tucker's Choefhori, Xei requires a personal subject, I have p. 246.—TV<J>XOV is unseen, as in T7'aeh. preferred 0UXXMS TIS to (j>i~K\oi\r)s iiir' arrjs (J.). H. quotes n.): TIS is then collective, as in At. 965 Pind. 01. 12. 9 TWV Se fxeWovTuv T6T6(with J.'s note). J. was inclined either to (p\wvTai (ppaiai. Add Pyth. 10. 63 ra 5' read avdp&wov in v. 1 or to substitute TIS els iviavrbv aTtztcfiapTov Tvpovor)(ro.i. K\Hffi.v for OOTIS; but the latter is open to H. renders: the objection that the /cXowes do not perish every season. Duentzer omitted yap and ' Never before thy view Let a man's great Wealth be a star; retained OOTIS. With respect to the meaning of Tavv\oiov, J. writes: ' / / . 16. 767For his days that flourish are few TaviJ
ZO*OKAEOYS

238

The metrical scheme is:

Let a man live, being a man, With brief dispose for the day, As within that narrower span To enjoy what pleasure he may; For the path is blind of the morrow, And darkness wrappeth it round.'

For the hypercatalectic colon (v. 3) see on fr. 59 r.

594 cuyXij 5 9 4 Hesych. I p. 70 017X1; • x (aiyKrixi^wv cod.: corr. Scaliger). 2ooKXTJS 'Typei.

the Atticist (ed. Schwabe, p. 95). Hesych.

I.e. <xf7Xar a/j.-Ttbv~\ Kal TriSr) wapa ' E n - TTIV vviv TOO dpirrpov. T h e r e is enough

X^pf-f £•>Bdicx<"s (fr. 20 K.). M. Schmidt, whom Nauck follows, was probably right in regarding xirc6c as an interpolation intended to replace the corrupt x^ar- See also Bekk. anecd. p. 354, 17 aiy\i]...Kal

here to show that 0^7X17 could be used for a personal ornament, whether as made with shining metal or set with precious stones. Probably, but not necessarily, an armlet is meant: Asius fr.

X^tdwv 54 Tts ovTtos etcaXeLTO. t-viot d£ <patrc • 13 K. SaiSaKeoi Se x^'^ w > ' e s &P' d/x^>l ei Kal TOV trepnrdSiov K6
d

This is derived from Pausanias

595 /ce/3/ciSos (jxovnj b

5 9 5 Arist. poet. 16 p. I454 36 tlbr\ yh&Trav 17 x^Pi Kai Tlp&KV7)s rois Se ava-yvuplaeois, Trpi&TT] /tin 17 drex"')™'™; ra w B T W firjviet. Kal irpbs ...i] 5ta ru)v ffijixeiav...detirepcu 64 at 7reauTyv a ir^irovde T-Q KepKidt XaXet". I t iroL-qiUvaL virb TOV TTOLTJTOV, 3LO otrex^ot olov should be observed that, whereas Apollo...iv TQ lioipoKhtovs Tijpei T\ TOV KepidSos dorus intimates that letters inwoven were the medium of information, Achilles (5. 3) describes a picture of the outrage as actually embroidered on the robe. Moreover the latter represents Philomela as present while Procne examines the picture: that, 194 T\ 54 vcp-tivtura kv irtTr\(p ypd/i/jLara Slot at any rate, cannot be Sophoclean. Note TOVTWV 4fj."r}yvffe H.p6Kvr} ras iSias av/xtpopds. that KepictSos practically = v<paS I closely followed by Achill. Tat. 5. 5 yvovv.—if>(i>vt] was not intended to suggest yap it\o/iri\as ftxvri aiuirSxxa i} the noise of the moving shuttle: see on Qitivfy. v^>alv€L yap ir£ir\ov ayye\ov fr. 890.
Tyrwhitt was the first to recognize that KepiuSos 4>«i)vrj are the actual words of Sophocles. For the circumstances see Introductory Note, and cf. Apollod. 3.

rb 5pd/j.a TT\4KCI rait

Kp6t
THPEYI—TPITTTOAEMOS

239

TPinTOAEMOI

Pliny {n. h. 18. 65 = Soph. fr. 600) states that the Triptolemus was produced 145 years before the death of Alexander. Since Alexander died in 323 B.C., the date of the Triptolemus is accordingly fixed as 468 B.C. If Pliny's remark is to be construed strictly, the Triptolemus was put on the stage in the year before the production of the Septem contra Thebas of Aeschylus. It has been observed that the fragments of the Triptolemus recall the Prometheus Vinctus, not only by reason of the structure and compass of the speech in which Demeter despatched Triptolemus on his mission, but also by the appearance of the particular phrase addressed by Prometheus to Io1. The date of the Prometheus is2 uncertain, and some recent authorities place it later than 468 B.C. They do not seem to have noticed that, if the relevance of the Sophoclean fragments is admitted, there can be no question which of the two poets was the imitator. Although there is3 no good reason for discrediting Pliny's evidence, Welcker minimized its importance by interpreting it to mean only that the subject of Triptolemus was handled by Sophocles, who commenced to write for the stage in 468. For that year, in which Apsephion was archon, was famous as the occasion of the first appearance of Sophocles in the Dionysiac contest at the age of 28, when he was adjudged the first prize to the chagrin of Aeschylus4. There are, in any case, sufficient grounds for believing that the Triptolemus was an early work, belonging to a time when the author was still largely influenced by the manner of his great predecessor. We should not therefore be surprised to find in it a plot free from complicated action, together with an abundance of narrative and description. The scene of the play was almost certainly Eleusis Triptolemus is an Eleusinian chieftain in Horn. h. Dem. 153, which is the earliest mention of his name, and is one of those to whom the institution of the Eleusinian mysteries was entrusted (ib. 474). But the Homeric hymn, in which Triptolemus only appears incidentally, was not the source of the play of Sophocles. The later authorities, who, of course, drew upon Attic sources, agree in representing Triptolemus as the favourite of 1 2

See on fr. 597. Dieterich in Pauly-Wissowa I 1079, Sikes and Willson, Introd. p. x x x v i n ; on the other side see Wecklein, Einl. p. 24, and Christ-Schmid, Gr. Lit? p. 297. 3 4 p. 310. Plut. dm. 8, Mann. Par. 56.

24o

IO<1>OKAEOYI

Demeter, who inspired him to invent the plough, and to teach men the.art of agriculture. Cf. Verg. Georg. I. 19 uncique puer monstrator aratri. Callim. h. Dem. 22 avUa Tpi7TToAe/to9 dyaOav eSiSacriceTo re^vav. The goddess also sent him forth from Eleusis in a magic chariot drawn by a pair of dragons1, to traverse the earth, and to diffuse among mankind the blessings which had been first bestowed upon Attica. Cf. Ov. Trist. 3. 8. 2 nunc ego Triptolemi cuperem. conscendere currus, | misit in ignotam qui rude semen humum. Cornut. 28 p. 53, 22 Tavrrjv (i.e. corn) Be [AuOeveTat. airelpai, Sid rfj<; olKOVfievq-i 6 TjOMTToAe/io? o 'JL\evGivio<; dva^i^aadar]^ avrbv iirl ivrepunrnv SpaKovreov o'yrjfia •777? Arjfir)Tpo<;. H i m e r . or. 25. 3 rov 'EXevcrlviov eT)/Bop dpSrjvat, Xoyo<; 7TjOO? Ar]/j,7jTpo<;! iva rfjv vofidSa rpatre^av rjfiepois d/j,eiy]rr)

irvpols. For the distribution in this manner of r/fiepos «ap7ro? throughout Greece see Pausan. 7. 18. 2, 8. 4. 1. The orators were never weary of pointing out to their audience the distinction of Attica as the original home of agriculture2. But there was a wide-spread divergence of opinion concerning the identity of Triptolemus, as may be seen from the variant accounts given in Pausan. 1. 14. 23. This shows that, though his civilizing mission was accepted as beyond question, the story of Triptolemus did not rest upon any dominant literary tradition. How then did Sophocles treat the subject ? From the fragments themselves all that can be made out with certainty is that the play contained a description of the journey of Triptolemus over the earth in the chariot drawn by serpents. Frs. 597—599, and possibly also frs. 600—604, belong to the speech of Demeter. Several of the words or phrases refer to crops, or articles of diet: see frs. 606—6104. But we must look elsewhere for indications of the tragic conflict, which must somehow or other have been connected with the favour shown to Triptolemus. (1) Gruppe, Ariadne, p. 358, found it in the story of Lyncus, the Scythian king, who, as related by Ov. Met. 5. 642—661, attempted to put Triptolemus to death, in order to supplant him, and was subsequently transformed into a lynx. (2) Petersen, in a review of Welcker, treated Charnabon (fr. 604 n.) as the chief opponent5. It is unnecessary to discuss these suggestions, in view of what 1 It is altogether improbable that this was an invention of Sophocles : see Gruppe, 5445. Philochorus evidently regarded it as belonging to ancient tradition, when he rationalized it as a ship of war (FUG I 388). 2 3 e.g. Isocr. 4. 25. See also Frazer's note. 4 No doubt most of these describe the diet of the peoples whom Triptolemus was to visit. 5 Nauck refers to a Hanover dissertation of Jul. Schonemann (1886), p. 118, as reviving this opinion. Knaack also thought that Charnabon appeared in the play [Jahrb.f. Philol. cxxxv [1887], p. 800).

TPITTTOAEMOI

241

will presently be said about Welcker's theory. (3) Welcker found a clue to the chief subject of the tragedy in the concluding part of Hygin. fab. 147. The other authorities which contain the same story are Serv. V&rg.Georg. 1. 19, schol. Stat. Theb. 2. 382, and Mythogr Vat. II 99. It is said that, after Triptolemus had returned from his journey, a king named Cepheusor Celeus sought to kill him through jealousy, but was compelled by Demeter to yield his kingdom to her favourite. Triptolemus is represented as the son of Eleusinus, and is declared to have founded a town called Eleusis after his father, who had instituted in honour of Demeter the feast known as Thesmophoria. Welcker's view was accepted by Preller {Myth. I p. 636) and by H. W. Stoll in Roscher II 1028, but it involves the difficulty that if the drama included the departure of Triptolemus, as well as the successful issue of the conflict after his return, the unity of time was destroyed1. Welcker frankly admitted this, but claimed that the successful completion of the adventurous journey rather than its inception deserved to be represented, and that the foundation of the Eleusinia was subsequent to the spread of agriculture over the world by Triptolemus. He escaped from the dilemma by the assumptions that Triptolemus on his return himself described how he had been despatched on his mission by Demeter, and that the goddess was not represented on the stage at this period of the action. The expedient is hardly successful. I think that, if any one will examine frs. 597—599 without prejudice, he will hesitate to conclude that they are all taken from a speech of Triptolemus describing the nature of the commission which was assigned to him. Moreover, Welcker's assumption contradicts the express statement of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (fr. 598), that Sophocles put Demeter on the stage giving directions to Triptolemus concerning the lands which he would have to traverse in spreading abroad the bounty of the goddess. It is unreasonable to reject the single piece of trustworthy evidence which bears on the plot in favour of a mere guess—for it is nothing more—that the conflict with Cepheus provided the climax of the action. So far from agreeing with Welcker that the departure of Triptolemus could not have formed the conclusion of the play, I believe that the gift of corn was the main theme to which the rest of the action was subordinate. The momentous character of the commission entrusted to Triptolemus, and the lustre which it shed upon Attica in the eyes of posterity, combined to make his departure on a divinely ordered journey eminently suitable as the finale of a play in which the young 1 This consequence was accepted by Ahrens, who compared the Eumenides of Aeschylus as a similar case.

P. II.

16

242

I04>0KAE0YZ

dramatist sought to celebrate the Eleusinian hero for the first time before a wider public. But that which chiefly needed explanation was the reason why Triptolemus had been so highly blessed. In order to discover an answer, we must return to the domestic history of Celeus, the Eleusinian, whose house was honoured ,by a visit from Demeter, when, disguised as an old woman, she was mourning for the loss of Persephone. In the Homeric hymn the daughters of Celeus found her at the 'Maiden well,' and introduced her as nurse to their infant brother Demophon. Metanira, the mother, was alarmed by the strange proceedings of the goddess, who stealthily by night bathed the child in the fire, in order to make him immortal. So she cried aloud in dismay; but Demeter was wroth with her, and put down the child. Before leaving the house, she revealed herself, and explained how the mother's folly had frustrated her son's happiness. This story was subsequently combined with the local tradition which made Triptolemus the minister of Demeter's bounty. Thus in Ov. Fast. 4. 507—560 the child's name has been changed to Triptolemus, and the goddess, when interrupted, promises that he shall be the first man to plough and sow,—as a compensation for the loss of his immortality. In Hygin. fab. \Ar7 the-facts are similar, but the father's name, as we have seen, is different, and he is killed by the goddess in anger. There is good reason to suppose that this version goes back to Panyassis (EGF p. 263). The death of the father, who however is called Celeus, is mentioned also in Nonn. 19. 85, where Demeter consoles Triptolemus and Metanira. But the death of Celeus seems to have occurred after the gift of corn, although the description is far from clear; and the story perhaps ran parallel to the legend of Icarius. In Apollod. 1. 31 f. the mother interrupts, as in the hymn, with the result that the child (Demophon) was consumed in the flames. Demeter then provided the winged car for Triptolemus, the elder of Metanira's children, and gave him wheat to sow over the whole world. It is obvious that, if Triptolemus was to be made the hero of a play, and the events which led to his mission were to be included in the scope of the action, the version preserved in Apollodorus was alone suitable for the purpose1. It is therefore suggested that the identification of Triptolemus with the elder son of Metanira may have been taken from Sophocles, and that the earlier part of his play included the coming of Demeter to Eleusis, and the failure of her first attempt to reward the hospitality of Celeus. 1 Hartung overlooked this when he supposed that in Sophocles Triptolemus was Demeter's nurseling (p. 159).

TPITTTOAEMOI

243

Strabo 27 compares the play with the prologue to the Bacchae, as illustrating the carelessness in geographical matters of later writers as contrasted with Homer: o fih TOV AIOVVUOV iiriovra Ta eavr] pd%cov, 0 Be TOV TpLirr6\efi,ov rrjv KaTaaTreipofievrjv yrjv, TO, /j,ev TTO\V SiacnraHTi.

oiecrTwra

crvvaTTTovcriv

iyyi"!,

ra

Se

wveyv

Brunck inferred that it was a satyr-play on the strength of frs. 606, 610, 611, but has found no one to agree with him. For fragments conjecturally assigned to this play see on frs. 804, 837, 844, 959, 1089, 1116.

596 0aipbv d 596

SpdKOVTe Koen : SpaKovTa Etym. M. \ Batpbv Rufus al.: S' alpov Etym. M.

5 9 6 Etym. M. p. 395, 11 7rXi
Rufus was a medical writer of the age of Trajan, from whom Pollux made considerable excerpts in his second book: see Poll. 2. 172, where the same extract appears with unimportant variations. Schol. Ar. Ach. 217 fvdtv /cat TO

in which is seated Triptolemus, his head wreathed with a white band, from which two yellow corn-ears stand up: in his left hand he holds a sceptre; with his right he holds out a shallow saucer, into which Demeter is pouring wine, as he departs-' (J.) Frazer on Pausan. 7. 18. 3 (ivp. 142) gives a list of the references to Triptolemus and his car in ancient works of art (see also Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 569), and remarks: 'Sometimes the car has wings attached to the wheels, but no serpents; sometimes it is drawn by serpents without wings ; sometimes both the serpents and the wings are depicted attached to the car.' The literary authorities speak of a car drawn by two winged serpents:

irepifiaSriv a/j.<j>nr\i^ iraph 2o0o/cXeJ iv

Apollod. I. 32 Si TTT7IVWV SpaKOVTWV,

/ty ' dp&KovTa 5' alpov dix
p. 147, 4 (cf. p. 240 f.) TO Si ^terafu offx^ov Kai uTroo-Tri/xaTos Kai ix-qpov x \ i x d 5 a , Kai TO dtafiaiveiv 5ia7rXtcrcrety ' Kai TO Trepi^dSTjv d/j....ei\r]
TpnrToX^fup (hence the same appears in Cornut. 28 p . 54, r irTcpwruiv SpaKbvTuv Suid. s.vv. anew\L£aTo, -wepi.fid&-nv, 7r\(f, a, schol. Aristid. ill p. 54 Dind. and Greg. Cor. p. 548). Hesych. II e£ otpeojv irTepwTuiv, Nonn. Dionys.

p. 297 daipbs' b dirjKUi' dwo TOV avui 13. 1 90 ff. T/)i7rr6Xe/ios...5i0/)oi' ^x^vrjevTO. fttpovs ews KaTu o~Tpo
//. p. 914, 34 (Ael. Dion. fr. 391 Schw.)

642 geminos deafertilis angues \ curribus admovit frenisque coercuit ora. Fast. 4. 497 frenatos curribus angues j iuttgit. r6 irepiexbfjievoi* xjirb TWV 7ro5C}v. The view that the magic car was an yap TO ^rj/j.a. invention of Sophocles has no probability The line describes the car drawn by (see Introductory Note). Gruppe, p. 8072, winged dragons or serpents, which thinks that serpents were associated with Demeter gave to Triptolemus at the the sun, and that it was as a sun-god that commencement of his journey. ' It may Triptolemus rode in the winged car. be seen on a vase from Kertsch, figured O. Kern, Eleusin. Beitr. Halle, 1909, in Baumeister's DenkmdUr, p. 1858. p. i i , shows that Sophocles drew his The two serpents have twined the middle description from the Eleusinian mysteryparts of their bodies round the axle,— play. thus harnessing themselves to the chariot, Ocupov here is clearly the axle, and the datpbs 6 d^uv irapa 'ZoipoKKeZ Cf. Phot,

ed. Reitz. p. 103, 10 d^wrXif1 dfKpi-

16—2

Z00KAE0Y2

244

connexion between this meaning and that found in Horn. M 459 (iron pegs working in stone sockets, serving as hinges to a door, as explained by Leaf) appears in the explanation of Hesychius (I.e.). It should, however, be mentioned that in Poll. 1. 253 Baipol appears to be the name given to the side-boards which form part of the iwepTepia or body of the car.—<X(j.urXi£ is glossed by irepifiaS-qv (see above), and here suggests that the serpents drew the car by holding the axle within their grip, that is to say, by coiling themselves round it (dairep av ei l(f>v

to ev Siafifa. T h e cognates of 3rX/
KvXlOjxivlOV

•wepifidvTes

KaX

TTO.Xaf.OV TWV,

8T0.V

TOTS tTKfXeai. Kartywcnv.

T h u s in t h e account of a wrestlingm a t c h in Heliod. 10. 32 a/j.|3ui'as rk

ue. ' p i n n i n g his legs

by gripping them with his feet and the inside of his thighs.' Strattis fr. 63, I 729 K . TO Bvyarpia \ irepi TT)V XeKavrjv airaVTa irepurewXty/j.e'va.

There is little doubt that iroaai irepi.TTXIKTOTS should be read in Theocr. 18. 8, means strictly ' having the legs a-straddle' of the maze of interlacing feet. See also (Achill. Tat. 1. 1: Europa riding on the Heyne on Horn. *)> 120. The derivation bull, ov Trept^adtjv dXXa Kara irXevpav), of these words does not appear to be and is the exact equivalent of a.jj.).

The

word

Archil, fr. 58 oi rpiXiia piiyav GTpaTyybv otibe diaTreir\iyi/.&oi'} which corresponds

TTXL£, TTXIXOS 'the fork,' correspond to

those of the Engl. split (C.R- x v n 29:).

597 ere o iv p€vo<s SeA/roicri TOVS ifiiovs 597

\6yovs

5 9 7 Schol. Pind. 01. 10 [ u ] . 1 Kal Drama, p. 144) : see the Introductory 2O0OKXT7S iv Tpi7rroXe/^y ' ffh 5' ev... Note. . Cf. Phil. 1325 KOX ravr' eiriarw, Kal Xbyovs.'

ypd(pov (ppevCiv law.

In Aesch. Prom. 815 the phrase is used by Prometheus, when instructing Io in the course her wanderings are to take: GO\ irp&TOV l o t iroXijdovop TTX6.VT]V (ppdo'co, | r\v tyypacpov ffii fJLvfifi.offiv S^XTOIS tppevQiv.

Hence it may be safely assumed that these are the words of Demeter addressed to Triptolemus. The whole of her speech, describing the wanderings of Triptolemus, seems to have been based upon the Prometheus of Aeschylus (Haigh, Tragic

Trach.

682 iraprjKa

07rws SOaviiTTov iK S^Xrof ypatpr]v. Aesch. Cho. 448 TOLCLUT' aKoiwv e"v <j>pe
i/ias yiypawTai..—The publication of Drachmann's edition of the scholia has altered the data (see cr. n.), but Scaliger's Bis remains an attractive conjecture.

598 TO. 8' i^oTTiade x£l/°os ^s ^a Sefia a re 7racra /cat Tvp
1 eh codd.

5 9 8 Dionys. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1. 12 jxapTvpel Si /iov TI} Xdyif 'ZtxpoKXris /iei> 6 rpayifdoiroibs ev TpiirroXifUji bpd/ian.

2 Tvpp-qviKbs codd. irewoiijTat yap airy AT)fi,-r)Ti)p SiddffKovaa TpnrTbXe/j.ov, dai\v x ^ p a c avayKaGB-qaeTai avelpwv TOIS doBeitriv vw' airr)s KapirotS

TPIITTOAEMOI

245

'ixvijaBeiaa Si rrjs eyou Trpdrov Xetpfoi Horn. h. Herm. 153 x^Xup eparr?v IraXtas, i] itsriv a-wh dVpas 'lairvytas CTT' cipuTTepa x«pos e4pywv), the latter is pexpi wopff/jMu Zi/ceXi/coD, rat /xerk TOVTOalso to be connected with i^birtirde, and TTJS avriKpii a^a/xivri 2t/ceX£as £TTI TTJV that this is established by fr. 534 efoTicra €i)(xi 'TO 5' ef67ri
ZO^OKAEOYI

246

599 Se
a80is vulgo Comp. Gr. 11 p. 488 E. tr. ; KuehnerBlass II 122). Wilamowitz _on Eur. Her. 311 advocated the restoration of XFh in Eur. fr. 733 TO yap XPV (wf^"

5 9 9 Schol. Soph. O.C. 504 x / j

/i' £<j>evpeiv~\ xPe^V ixPV conj. Blaydes and N a u c k needlessly) larai Kara crvva\ot
codd.) fieT^ov rj TO firj xPe^"'

a

"d

Diels

prints TO x/>h eoVTa in Democritus (frs. 174, 256). I cannot see the advantage of writing XPV"™- No doubt XPV" was a unit, as exPV" shows, but xfrfG™ cannot ever have been regarded as an ordinary future.—For a«Tis see on fr. 314, 227 f.

It is unnecessary to repeat here the facts collected in Jebb's Appendix to O.C. 504 (p. 280), but it should be added that the truth of Ahrens's view is now more generally recognized (Brugmann,

600

\et fortunatam Italiam frumento canere candido] 6OO Plin. n. h. 18. 65 hae fuere sententiae Alexandra Magno regnante, cum clarissima fuit Graecia atque in toto orbe terrarum potentissima, ita tamen ut ante mortem eius annis fere CXLV Sophocles poeta in fabula Triptolemo frume^tum Italicum ante cuncta laudaverit, ad verbum translata sententia 'et fortunatam... candido.' The fertility of the Italian corn-lands, as compared with those of their own country, was well known to the Greeks. Polybius (2. 15) instances the cheapness of wheat in his own time as a proof of the abundance of corn grown in Italy; and Strabo (242) praises the productive-

ness of Campania. The Athenians, who lived principally on imported corn (Dem. 20. 31), proposed in the year 325-324 B.C. to found a colony on the shore of the Adriatic for the purpose of the corn-trade (CIA II 809; Dittenberger, Syll? 153). No doubt ev8a.lij.ova was the original of fortunatam: cf. Pausan. 1. 12. 1 r-qv re 'IraXlav SiS&trKovres, us ei8ai/j.ovlas iveKa ivrl T&
For Pliny's reference to the production of the Triptoletnus see Introductory Note. For the meaning of 'IraXia see on fr. 598, 2; and for the cultivation of the vine there cf. Ant. 1119, Lucian navig.

601

; yovrj 6O1 Hesych. II p. 356 'IWvpls ymi)' dvrl TOV 'IXXujois yeved (yovta cod.: corr. Musurus). ypa
OVTUIS.

2O0OKX^S

T/H7TTO\^U<(J.

M.

Schmidt preferred to write 'IXXupis yovrf' ...yovta, which is hardly intelligible. Musurus was surely r i g h t : so rpiTOo-irdpip yavy in Aesch. Pers. 820 is explained by schol. M as rphr) TWV ixeTayevecripuv yeveq..

It is hazardous to guess at the context, but it is probably safe to infer that yovi) had a concrete sense, perhaps that of

produce. Illyria was famous for cattle rather than corn: see [Arist] mir. ausc. 128, quoted by Grote i n p. 423. We cannot tell what moved Callistratus to support the variant 71)77; but it is surprising to find the authority of an early Alexandrian cited in favour of the fem. 71)77, which since Elmsley's note on Eur. Hclid. 839 has been always condemned as a late error, yvv-j was probably a mere blunder; and it is worthy of mention that yvvat and yoval are variants for the genuine 71)011 in Ant. 569.

TPinTOAEMOI

247

602 KpdcnreS' acnrdtpfxai, 6O2 rjj> add. Bergk:Kpdtrireda dcnrafo/itcu A 6O2 Schol. Eur. Tro. 221 TU>h (paai was an early play, it must be remembered Kal ir\v 'Pci/xrji/ KOX T^V KapxtSbpa irpb that the name of Carthage had become (Schwartz: dirb A) TTJS irpoi'njs 6\ufj.Tnddos familiar to the Greeks at the end of the Persian wars in consequence of the simul0 / p taneous struggle waged by their kinsmen ov oLKi
603 criX(j)iov spice (' speciem odoratam, cuius generis 6O3 Proverb, cod. S (Palis, suppl. Gr. 676; L. Cohn Zn den Paroennogr. erat silphium : sic enim proprie ra elSr/ recentioribus sunt usitata'). in Breslauer philol. Abhandl. II 2 p. 71) ai\iov \ei/j.wv" 2Ot7rToV/u<j) What o-CX<j>iov (laserpicium = lac sirpi•n-epl rfjs (1. 777s) iv Atpvri TO cri\ TTJS (Neil on Ar. Eq. 893). Ridgeway (Early AI^I/IJS TO o-iK?)s, suggests that etSos is used in the sense of

248

604 Kcd Xapva/3£>vT0<s os 604

VCTWV

&s VerCiv Lobeck : 6V1 ™ 8s ye cod. Haun., Saris TGIV tide cod. Vind.

6O4 Herodian Trepi /iov. Xef. p. 9, 30 fiujv. SOC/HJKXTJS Tpi7rroXe/i<^ ' tcai pfwi>Tos.. .Tavvv.' The text was restored and the relevancy of the quotation established by Lobeck, Aglaoph. p. 215, from Hygin. poet. astr. 2. 14 hunc (Ophiuchum) complures Charnabonta dixerunt nomine Getarum regent, qui stint in Mysia regione, fuisse: qui eodem tempore regno est potitus quo primum seminctfrugum mortalibus tradita esse existimantur. Ceres enim cum sua beneficia largiretur hominibics, Triptolemum, citius ipsn. fuerat nutrix, in curru draconum collocatum...iussit omnium nationum agros circumeuntetn seminapartiri ...qui cum pervenisset adeum quern supra diximus Getarum regem, ab eo primum hospitaliter acceptus, deinde. ..insidiis captus.. .pene perdidit vitam. Charnabontis enim iussu cum draco unus eorum esset interfectus... Ceres eo venisse et ereptum adolescenti cun-um dracone altero

subiecto reddidisse, regent „ .poena non medioc7-i affecisse narratur. Charnabon, who is a doublet of the Scythian Lyncus (Ov. Met. 5. 645) and of the Eleusinian Celeus or Cepheus (Hygin. fab. 147), is otherwise unknown; but Carnabas is the name given by Eustath. //. p. 448, 8 to the Perrhaebian who took refuge at Zeleia in the Troad, after killing his father Triopas. Curiously enough Triopas is confused with Charnabon in a schol. on Ov. Met. 2. 138, and an extract quoted by Ellis on Ov. Ib. 287. These two passages were pointed out by Knaack in Jahrb. f. Philol. cxxxv (1887) 318 f., but are not of any independent value in explaining the tradition which Sophocles followed.—This is the earliest reference to the Getae : cf. Hdt. 4. 93. The transference of the Balkan tribe to Mysia may be connected with the flight of Carnabas to Zeleia. For migration between Thrace and Mysia see Macan on Hdt. 7. 20.

605 rj\dev Se Acus Oakeia, Trpeo-fiio-Tr) dewv. 6O5 ftiXeict Kuster: 0ti\ei.. cod. | 7rp6r/3is rij cod.: corr. Musurus 6O5

Hesych. I p. 455 Sals- 1,o<j>o- Hes. Theog. 231, and Gruppe, Gr. Myth. 7} bC ip&vajv eyw^ta. p. 1068, points out that the theogonies p had much to do with the growth of these This line appears to describe one of the abstract deities. irp«rPtv.' IVIOL Se ras Mo&ras.

TPITTTOAEMOI

249

606 ov8' rj TaXaiva hovara Tapiyiqpov ydpov The "fiXercupos is a sorry abridgement which does not justify the attribution of play is preserved by Athen. 67 c 2O
Pollux 6. 65 ydpos,

KXTJS 'ovb" TJ...ydpov.'

ws 2O0O-

T h e n a m e of the

607

the sheaves: hence the epithets d/iaXXoTSKOS Nonn. Dion. 31. 38, 45. 101, 48. J/.) ' 8pdy/j.aTa, d£tr/j.7] {peajxat cod.) TWV 678; d/j.aXXo
608

6 O 8 Harpocr. p. 125, 26 ^eXLv-q... yap Kal 'Hp65oro? Kai %tva(pG)v drfKvK&s 6o"jrplov 4O~TI
\rpiirTO-

Millet was extensively grown as a

Xe/xov A C G , TpnroXefiov B) ' KVTJUI) (ij.vi))i.ov cereal, at any rate in Thrace (Dem. 8.

BCG) /j.eXlrris.' Phot. lex. p. 255, 25 45). Nauck thought that KVT||III was and Suid. s.v. fieXlv-rj, which are abbrevi- corrupt and proposed KV^KOV, comparing Hesych. II p . 497 KvijKos...eiS6s TI airipated from the same source : So^o/fX^s pev

IOOKAEOYS

250

paras- xal vvpbs. But Campbell aptly refers to Theophr. hist, plant. 9. 13. 5, and hesitates between the meanings ' the space between two knots in the stalk,' and ' the long rounded ear of the millet plant.' I see no reason why the growth

of the plant should not be so described. Ellendt preposterously suggests that the second syllable of neXlvrjs was long : if the metre was iambic, why not ^

609 opivhrjv aprov Rice-growing is usually mentioned in 6O9 Athen. 110 E dplvSov (dpviSov cod.: corr. Casaubon) 5' aprov /iifirqTai. connexion with India, but op(v8T]s d'pTOS seems to have been introduced here SO0O(CX^S if T/HlTToX^UIjJ, iJTOL TOV Hrather as the food of the Aethiopians, optifys yevofievov rj dirb rod e"v AWioxia yivo/jUvov o-irip/xaTos, b' iariv b'/xoiov atfadynf. to whom Triptolemus brought the gift of Demeter. Certainly rice was not Hesych. Ill p. 219 dpivStjv aprov irapa A.WLo\pi. Kai o'ire'pfia irapairX^iffiov o~T]o~dfj.ri a Greek food, although Chrysippus, a writer on cookery, included (ipuf/rjjr (alaafxri cod.), Sirep tif/ovres anovvrai. irXdKoOs in a list of cakes (Athen. 647 D). nvh 8£ b'pvfav. Megasthenes ap. Athen. 153 E mentions These passages evidently go back to boiled rice together with various kinds the same original : see also Bekk. anecd. of dressed meats (?a sort of curry) as p. 54, 1 (Phryn. praep. soph. p. 93, 7) served up at an Indian banquet. In opivSa- rjv ol TTOWOI opvfav KaXovcnv, and Hor. Sat. 1. 3. 155 tisanarium oryzae, Pollux 6. 73 dplvSijv TWO. iprov AWLoires, 1 rice-tea,' is the diet of an invalid. rbv e^ dpivSiov yiyvbixevov, 6 iart. ^

6lO Se 610

TOV

-yepcraZov ov8' vcriv <

TTOTOV

>

oiS' ialv warbv Mekler: ov Sueic cod.

Athenaeus at length, as giving practically all the available information concerning ppvrov (-os). It will be seen that it is spoken of contemptuously as the fipvTov tj QpTJi.£ avT]p I 1) #/)&; ^/3/ji)fc, Ki5(35a drink of uncivilized or remote tribes; 8' fp> Trovevniiiri.' /ivrtfloveljei TOV wtifiaros and Miss Harrison has noticed (Prol. AlcrXuXos £v AvKofipyq (fr. 124) ' KO\K TUIV- p. 423) that it never appears as the 5' iwive [ipvTov iffX'a.ivw (lo-xva.ifi.ov conj. national drink of Hellas even in primitive Headlam in C.R. XVI 4342) XP^V I times. In Aeschylus it is the drink 1 Kd.tTefivOKbfJ.irec TOUT ev dvdpeio. ffre'yr].' of the savage Lycurgus, who opposed 'EWdviKos 8' ev Kr(credyoL (Aesch. Suppl. 964) to oppose the claims elo-lv iiriQipei (FHG I 2 0 ) ' ' ras KpiBcis of agriculture. I suppose that \«po"atov is TO TTU/J.0. KaraXiovinv.' h Se T% rijs means 'muddy,' i.e. coming from the Eiptlnrris TreptbSy Ualovds 0?j a.v\Q

TPirTTOAEMOZ

251

some support may be drawn from Tr. fr. 246), who suggested that the lost adjective adesp. 261 vorls wpoaavpl^ovaa x^P^^f may also have been y\vKvi> or <j>i\ov. T P°XVi of rain falling into a dry rut: cf. This conjecture is much to be preferred Ant. 251 ar6> wieiv, or the more recent proJulian's well-known epigram: T<J v. The latter part of the line /3puj/ta. Com.fr. adesp. 1205, 4 (ill 606 K.) has been brilliantly emended by Mekler, a Kai KV<XIV TrewGxnv otixl jffyx&n/Mi. Eur. and independently by Tucker (C.R. x v n i fr. 469 vb/ios di Xetyav' e"KfiaX\ew Kvalv.

ov TpairelpvraL 611 Pollux 10. 79 T V 5' ai KtjXuca ip TpiirToX^/xiti XoOK\rjs dTri^SaKUTOV &V&lxa
iKiriirTojv, oiov els ISLoiTtKijv iravTaTraai TaTT€ivbT7)To. KaT^px^Tat.

Welcker's (p. 308) defence of Sophocles Hesych. 1 p. 267 airvvddKUTos' airvdfxsvos. is unconvincing: he suggests that the 2o<poK\ijs TpnrroXt/xif). Schol. Horn. A 634 verse refers not to a trivial incident of in Cramer anecd. Paris. Ill p . 16, 11 ordinary life, but to the feasts of the •jrvff/iTIv \4yerai Kai inVSai;, &Uev Kai initiated at the Eleusinian mysteries. We Trapoifiia irapa. ZiaKpdrei (2oOK\(i Cramer) are, however, perhaps justified in re' dTrvySd.KU}ros...Kv\L^.' Cf. Mantiss. procalling that the play was probably an verb. 1. 22 (Paroem. 11 747). The line is early one (see Introductory Note).—The also referred to by Etym. M. p. 133, 50, wine-cooler, \pvKTrip, also called Swot, is Eustath. //. p. 870, 27. (Pausan. fr. thus described by Poll. 6. 99 ov /XTJP ?X £ ' 289 Schw.) There is a more interesting irvdpAva, dXX' dcrrpayaXitTKovs, i.e. it was allusion to it in Demetr. de eloc. §1^4, supported by little knobs. Cf. schol. who, without giving the author's name, Ar. Vesp. 618 hivos de earw dyyewv... cites it as an example of frigidity, with fido-iv OVK ixov oXXd KaruBev inrbrpoxov. the interpretation : ami TOC airidnevos iiri Athen. 481 D classes Kv/j,f3La among cups Tpairefas K6\L£ O& rWerat. TO yap wpayfia irvd[i4va fj.i] ix^VT(j3Vt Homer's apfpiderov eTaL fffjuKpbv ov ov Six oyKov TOOOVTOV in ^ 270 was sometimes explained as TT)V X^fews. See Roberts, p. 232, who gives a-jridfiei>ov (piaKrjv (Athen. 501 A). Nestor's some English parallels, and refers for cup had two TrvO/xtves (Horn. A 635): see similar criticisms of Sophocles to de the discussion in Athen. 488 E. Lucian sublivi. 33. 5 6 S£ Hivdapos Kai 6 2oo/cX^s Lexiph. 13 has Tror^pta evirvvddKwra, ore fi£v dlov iravra cTri(p\eyovtTl TTJ 0o/>ct, which Mekler thinks may be a reminisafi4vvvvTai 5' a\6yus 7roXXd/ciS, Kai wiircence of Sophocles.—TpaireiJovTai: is set rovaiv arvx^GTara, and to Dion. H a l . on the table. Hence ^7riTpa7refuj/*ara of de •vet. script, cens. 2. 11 Kai TroXXdxis £K the various dishes served: see Athen. TTOWOV TOU [J.ey4ffovs ds Si&Kevov K6/JLTTOV 170 F.

6l2 eis bpdov ff>pov€lu 6 1 2 Antiatt.

(Bekk. anecd.) p. 92, 1

The use of tls opflov and the like pre-

€ts dpdbv poveiv. cisely as equivalent to adverbs of manner

2O0OKX?}J Tpi7rroX^/x. Priscian inst. 18. 202 (II p. 305, 16 Herz) illi ds dpdbv (ppovu et els Tavrtjv irpbOeaiv. Salhistius: 'in hunc modum disseruit1 pro 'hoc modo.'

is not common: cf. Trach. 347 (poivel SUrjs es dpSov. Jebb there quotes Thuc. 6. 82 es (al. uis) TO aKpiftis dwetv, but a better parallel is Eur. Phoen. 1210 TOVT'

I04>0KAE0YZ

252

els UTTOTTOV eZjros. The use is more common with nouns : see the examples quoted on Eur. Hel. 904 is aptrayas, and add Holden on Xen. Cyr. 8. 1. 33. The adverbial eis ipdbv can be traced to a local origin: O.T. 50 aTavres r' is

difias, i<7T)j, Tro. 465 alper' els dpdbv fr. 262 6s yap av trtpdkr) | els dpdbv.'iarq, fr. 382, 8 rj /lev els dpdbv fila, | \o%al S' iir' airijs rpets Kare&TripLyiiivai | elalv (the

letter E). els na\6v does not appear to be used except with riKetv (e.g. Plat. symp. 174 E) or some other verb of 6f>B6v, Eur. Or. 231 avdls fi' is 6p8bv (TTTJtrov, Suppl. 1229 fidvov ai) fie | is dpdbv motion.

613 dpap6.<7iiuiv- aaiveros. SOI^OKX^S. Gr. 11 p. 173 E. tr. For the meaning of The form d^paS/xav given by Hesychius the word cf. Aesch. Ag. 1400 ireipaaSi is contrary to the alphabetical order, following immediately after acfip&KTovs. /iov yvvawbs us i(ppd
614 614 Hesych. II p. 67 0 ^\ ^

p v , which seems to be followed in

T p \ ti {

The purpose of the note was to call attention to the metaphorical use of 2XKOS, which would be more vigorous than in the case of the English 'wound.' 'Sore' or 'stab' would come nearer. Cf. Solon 4 . 17 TOUT'

Aesch. Ag- 645 7r6X« ph 1\KOS Iv, rb SrfluovTVX&v. Pind. Pyth. 2. 91 ivirra^av ?X-]KOS dBvvapbv to" irpiffBe KapSia, [ irplv b'tra (ppovrlSt fnjTiovTac ru^eic Soph. Ant. 652 rl yap \ ytvon' av eX/cos f ij Kaicbs (pl\os; fr. 74T.

ijdrj Trdarj 7r6Xet e"pxeT<xi ZXKOS

615 'Ecrria 6 1 5 Philodem. de piet. p. 23 /ecu

the two goddesses, and it is interesting to find Sophocles taking notice of what appears to be a philosophical speculation based on the supposed etymology of For the identification of Ge with liestia Hestia. It should be added that the cf. Eur. fr. 944 xoi Yala nijrep'Eariav Pythagoreans called their central fire by 1 Si a ol trool | ppoT&v Kakovffiv ri/xivriv iv the names Ecma TOV -wavTos and n^T-qp aldipi, which is said to contain a reference ffedv: cf. Philolaus ap. Stob. eel. 1. 22. i d to the teaching of Anaxagoras (Diels, p. 196, 18 W. See also Suss in PaulyFragm.d. Vorsokratiker*, 46 A 20b). At Wissowa v m 1295, who thinks it probable a later date the Stoics adopted the same that the original identification was popular view: see on fr. 1128, 7. So far as I can rather than philosophical, but admits that discover, there is no other early evidence there is no evidence available to prove it. of a connexion between the worship of SO0OKX^S exv (fr. 290) T-IJV yrjv fj. < iyri > pa TWV deuiv <jn}<. , ev Tpi.irTo\i/j.ij> Si Kai 'Effriav el<.vai>.

TPITTTOAEMOZ—TPQIAOI

253

616 6 1 6 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 97, 33 feiTijXaTTjs" SO0OKX^S T/KTTTOWMCIJ. Hesych. II p. 256 fei^ijXdnjs• fieraflaTris,

ploughman, or (2) a charioteer. If Hesych. /.
17W0X0S. T h i s word m i g h t m e a n either (1) a

ductory Note. The occurs in fr. 8 7 8 .

fern.

fcvyr)\a.Tpis

617 lavya 6 1 7 According to Hesych. 11 p. 338 Sophocles used this word (or 'larva?) for 'a Greek woman.' See on fr. 56, where the passage is set out. It has been

pointed out that the appearance of the word in this play shows that Triptolemus travelled to Asia Minor (Malten in Herm. XLV 547).

TPQIAOI Troilus is mentioned by Homer as one of the sons whom Priam had lost, in a passage (ft 257) where the epithet lirinoyjipfj,rj^ is taken to indicate his prowess as a warrior1. Proclus, in his abstract of the Cypria (EGFp. 20), simply says that Achilles TpcolXov oveveo. Apollodorus is somewhat more explicit {epit. 3. 3 2 ) : /tt() Oappovvrcov Be TWV ftapftdpcov, A^iXXei)^ epeSpevaas TpailXov ev TW TOV %vfi$palov '\iroWa>vo<; lepw ovei'ei. H e is

confirmed by schol. T Horn. XI 257, who refers to Sophocles as his authority: ivrevdev So^o/cXrj? iv Tpooi^w (pija-lv avrov o^evOfjvat, VTTO A^iA,\6&)9 linrovt; yvfiva^ovra irapa TO ®v/x/3palov Kal dirodavelv. Welcker emended oxevOfjvai to Xoy^evdr/vai, on the strength of Eustath. //. p. 1348, 23 TpwiXov lTnrto-%dpMv> ov fyaalv iirvowi

'

ev T(Z ®ufi/3paiq> yv/J.vd£ovTa Xory^y ireaelv VTT

.

But Ivebpevaas in Apollodorus rather suggests j 3 : cf. Dio Chrys. 11. 77 ^"^ Tpwt'Xos re OUTGO? diro6vga-Kei d>v eTt, Kal Mr/aTwp iced dWoi irXeious. r/v yap 6 'A^tXXev? evehpevaai SeivoraTos Kal VVKTOS eiriQeadai. Although the Trojans were already shut up in the city, it is clear that the Thymbraeum was outside the walls (Dio Chrys. 11. 78). Fr. 619 shows that Sophocles agreed with the other authorities in repre1 Schol. A (see Lehrs, Ar.2 190 f.) contends that oi vewrepm based the story of Troilus i' iVirou dMKofievos on this epithet. Others think that the epithet is rather an allusion to a story already existing : Gruppe, p. 67212 The same correction has already been made by Maass.

254

I04>0KAE0YI

senting Troilus as a mere stripling: see note in loc. and add Callim. fr. 363, where he is introduced as an illustration of awpo? davaros. Vergil's allusion (A en. 1. 474 parte alia fugiens amissis Troilus armis, \ infelix puer atque impar congressus Achilli, \fertur equis, etc.) certainly suggests that Troilus was killed in battle, while fighting against Achilles : cf. Sen. Ag. 785. On the other hand, in Sophocles he was surprised by Achilles while exercising his horses, and it would seem that his sister Polyxena had gone with him to fetch water from the spring (cf. fr. 621). The presence of Polyxena, who escaped, is inferred from artistic evidence alone: see Robert, Bild u. Lied, p. 16, Gruppe, p. 672^ Troilus was accompanied by an attendant whom the Greeks regarded as the oriental counterpart of the iraihaycoycx;: see frs. 619, 6201. The scene was somewhere in the neighbourhood of the temple of the Thymbraean Apollo, and Welcker thinks that the chorus consisted of priests or country folk. It is perhaps more likely that they were the attendants of Troilus or Polyxena. With what motive then did Achilles waylay the youthful Troilus ? As an isolated incident of guerilla warfare, the death of Troilus might find its place in the epics, but does not seem to possess any dramatic value. Welcker meets the difficulty by conjecturing that the account of Lycophron (307—313) was founded on the play of Sophocles. There Troilus is beloved by Achilles, but infuriates him by rejecting his advances, and is slain at the altar of Apollo2, where he had taken refuge. Welcker does not suggest that in Sophocles Achilles pursued Troilus, because he was attracted by his beauty. Rather, he killed him in a skirmish, mistaking him for a full-grown warrior; but, when he saw the dead body, he was overcome with pity for the beautiful boy whom he had unwittingly slain. This is more fanciful than convincing. We can hardly draw any inference from the appearance of the et/wy^o?, but it might be plausibly argued that the love-motive was known to Sophocles from the fact that Phrynichus (TGF p. 723, PLG III 561) seems to have introduced Troilus in the character of epcofievos : Xdfnrei, 8' eVt •7rop
TPQIAOS

255

the original of Plautus's Bacchides, where it is mentioned at v. 954; and there seems to be good reason for 1supposing that it was at least as old as the time of Sophocles . If so, he was hardly likely to have neglected it, more especially as it provides an excellent explanation of the ambuscade which Achilles is said to have laid for Troilus. There is no room to speculate whether Achilles may have been swayed by conflicting motives, his duty to his country, and his love for Troilus; and it is equally 2idle to enquire how he was affected by the presence of Polyxena . It should be mentioned that Strattis wrote a comedy entitled Troilus (1 723 K.), and that this is supposed by some critics to have been a parody of Sophocles' play. Meineke even suggested {Hist. crit. p. 233) that a line of Strattis, y fitjiror, m iral ZTJVOS, e<' ? ravrov /j
vevor\ica
vvTa; there was an allusion to the epiveos of Horn. Z433, A 167. Ahrens was inclined to doubt whether Achilles appeared in the play at all, and thought that a considerable portion of it was occupied with the lamentations for the death of Troilus, and the description of his burial. But it is difficult to agree with a view which robs the story of its chief dramatic motive.

618 eyrj/xcv &>s eytqjxev aa) ©ertSt cru/x7rXa/ceis irore. 618.

2 iravTo/x6p(p(^ Heath: Troi>TOfj.6p(^ BV

6 1 8 Schol. Pind. Nem. 3. 60 wepl Si been explained; and Ellendt adopts a T??J fj.eTa^iopeo SITUS ^Xaare, -n-poaXeiirdav ipoi, 0. C. 336, and by (ru|iir\aKe£s. The latter does not Track. 1234 iir\Tfil fiiv davelv fibvq \ peralmean simply "united with her," but e s el TIOS col 5' aSBis ws ^x ' ^X "> Eur. I.A. "wrestling with her"—as Peleus is 649 iSoti, yiyrjBi.
See Gruppe, p. 672,.

2

See p. 163.

256

ZO^OKAEOYI

in Baumeister, p. 1797). Cp. Her. 3. 78 d(f>86yyovs, which he has recently repeated and reinforced in Neuejahrb.f. kl. Altert. avfiirXaK^VTos Se Tuifiptieu Tif Mdyy, XXVII (1911) 648 ff. It should, how"when Gobryas had grappled with him." ever, be observed that in the older story Translate, then : " H i s was an ill-omened it was the cry of Peleus that caused bride, and bereft of speech, when he Thetis to depart (fr. 151 n.), so that the wrestled of yore with Thetis of many shapes." Other interpretations are : taboo must have been somewhat different. (1) a(p86yyovs = d.(pa.Tovs (L. and S.), The illustrations from Greek art which "unutterable." (2) d66yyovs refers to depict the metamorphoses of Thetis are quoted by Frazer on Pausan. 5. 18. 5 the sea-goddess as not speaking with (ill p. 614) ireiroiriTcu de Kal &£TIS human speech, but only as gods speak: Si avTijs Ilj/Xeiis, Cp. Od. 5. 334 (Ino) 17 irplv fieii ir\v flpoTbs irapdevos, Xa/x^aperai Kal dirb rijs xelP°s T^s Q^'Sos $po8i<Tiav.. Av dyKaXais word with her husband. The husband elxe TTJV ^iXoix-ffXav 0 Tijpevs, IXKUV wpbs pretended to throw the child into the iavrbv us ivf/v rb (rH/xa Kal atflyyoip ev oven, when the mother cried out ' Leave XPV TV"
TPQIAOI

257

6ig TOV dvS/DOTrcuSa Seo-rroTTjis 619

6e<7irt>Triv G (compendio), coniecerat Blomfield : Seo~irbTT]s B C P | diriiXe
CQ 6 1 9 Schol. Pind. Pyth. i. 121 fiovXa.1 5£ 7rpeo"/3i^Tepat] oXov, vnep TT]V pe&njra jSouXetffl' KO.1 2O0OKXT)S iirl TOV TpwiXov ' Tbv.. .airtbXeaa,' iratda fxtv rr\v ijXiKlav, avSpa Se T<£ 0po>'ij/i<m. Hesych. I p . 189 avSpbiraiS' avSpotiftcvos 1)87] 7TOJS ' 7) dvSpbs

Dio Chrys. 11. 77 TpalXos re OBTOIS aTToffuyaKei ircus u>v In, Quint. 4. 431 eiv. Verg. Aen. 1. 475 infelixpuer. H o r . Carm. 1. 9. 15 SO0OKX^S TpwLXcp. In impubeni Troilon.

4>pbv7iaiv ^xorres. Hesychius irals should undoubtedly be The word avSpoircus signifies a lad on read for TTOJS, and %xwv ^a^ probably for the verge of manhood, and is synonymous ?XOVTCs; and the words are so printed by with avTlircus, which it is sometimes used Blomfield on Aesch. Theb. p. 156, but to explain: see on fr. 564. Aeschylus whether by his own conjecture or not used it in his description of Parthenodoes not appear. He was also justified paeus: 'fheb. 520 (SXaaTyiixa. KaXXlirpippov in restoring deaivbr-qv for 8eo"irbn]S (cr. n.),avSpdwais &v/ip. Tzetzes (on Lycophr. for the words are appropriate to the 1345 IIXKTJ veapdpos evirpeir4aTa.T0$ yirovs) character of the iraLdaywybs, on whom refers to the passage in Aeschylus thus: see Introductory Note. We may take it fieriippaae rb Alax^^ov • ov yap avSpothat Troilus is referred to as avSpbTratSa; TratSct (p-qffiv AldX'jXos, OUTOS veavbpov, ws he is generally described as a boy: cf.

620 yap op^eis ySacrtXls 6 2 0 Pollux 10. 165 ^(0ous de ovopia qui facii per alitwi facit per se, which as a grammatical principle I have illustrated on Eur. Hel. 112;, Hclid. 949. Add Xen. Ages. 1. 35, Andoc. 1. 20, 58. f Blaydes conj. iKTirji-qK' i/iotis or eKTeTfir/Kt Welcker supposed that these words fiov. The accent of SKakuri was corrected were spoken by the iraLSayojyos of by Dindorf from Arcad. p. 110, 2 Troilus: see Introd. Note. In order to (Chandler, § 132). avoid the reference to Hecuba, Bergk read crKaX/^i), but this was clearly a case of

ioixev etrai fiapfSapiKov 7) ir/caX^, 2o0o-

621

vapa Kai Kprjvata ^(opovfJiev irora. 621

vapa Kai M : vapa Se plerique codd.

6 2 1 Etym. M. p. 597, 45 vapbv, rb iiypbv ...SO0OKX^J TpwtXy ' irpbs... irord.' The same extract with unimportant variations is found in Etym. Gud. p. 409, i (cf. p. 627, 10) and in Orion p. n o , 1. Etym. M. continues : oiirw $iX6|ei'os. Kai l
rpitpaaa

TO a eis e Xiyei

vepbv. Orion adds an important particular, which determines the source of the quotation, that the information is P. II.

drawn from Philoxenus eV TCJ irepl ftovo{rvXX&fiwv pTju&Tuv.

This work,

which

is known from several quotations (see Lobeck, Paralip. p. 69), was written by Philoxenus of Alexandria, a grammarian contemporary with Varro, and is one of the chief sources to which the Byzantine Etymologica are ultimately traceable (Reitzenstein in Pauly-Wissowa,vi 809). vapa. The word strictly means 'flow-

258 persisted in local dialects, although it i n g ' : cf. Aesch. fr. 347 papas re p had disappeared from literature ; and his which Photius explains by peveTiicrjs. For inference is, confirmed by the remark in the root cf. "Ivaxe varop fr. 270. The the Etymologicum Magnum.—KdC: see article in Phrynichus (XXIV Ruth. [p. 42 Lob.] vr\pbv SSup ixriSafiws, dXXa irpbir- cr. n. The corruption is due to the (parov, a.KpIJIS, Track. 14 Kpovvol Steppalvovro K/njvatov and survives in the modern Greek vepbs. No doubt, as Rutherford observes, it 1TOTOV.

622

which might be worn double, was often of considerable size. It should be added that the dtpfna X4OVTOS mentioned in K 24, 178, which was worn as a x^ 11 '" 1 by Agamemnon and Diomedes, is described as iroSrjveKh. In the absence of context we cannot tell whether any more special Amelung (in Pauly-Wissowa III 2337) allusion—e.g. to an oriental dress—was compares the Homeric epithets fieydXri I 521, and iKTa&iri K 134 (see however intended. Leaf in loc), as indicating that the xXaira, 622

Hesych. 11 p. 432 Karop/3ii\ois

xXa.lva.is (Karap^iiXoi xXai"as cod. : corr. Musurus) * 7ro5?Jpecw, wtrre /cat eirl ras dpjSiiXas xaXau-fltu. ZO0OKXI7S TpulXiji. Cfp. 385 KaB&pPvXos xXavls- TroSrjpys ?ws TUJV apfivXwv (afitiXwv cod.).

623

d 0 ' o5 5rj Ka.1 fiaaav aiiTa. (sc. TO. fibpia) nal So0o/cX^s iv ttpT)Ke TOV tia.oxaXiaji.hv (cat ev 'HX^crpa 'HX^Krpa KO.1 TpalXip. Rohde, Psyche, e/i.a(rxaXia8ri. T h e word i/xacrxaXitrdr) is I4 p. 324, conjectured rbv Tp&xyXov for

omitted by Bernhardy on the authority of three MSS. The text of Suidas is obviously corrupt. Nauck suggests the insertion of KOX after etpr/Ke, in which case we should have to assume that two fragments were cited from the Troilus, one as above, and the other TOV fiavxa.\ujli.bv- This is not very plausible ; but it is still less likely that the words should be reshuffled as Bernhardy proposes,

TOV iiaaxo-Xuriibv, and this is perhaps the most satisfactory solution. The ancient evidence relating to /ia
sary to recapitulate it here. It may however be remarked that the similar customs existing among savage tribes, as collected etprjxe 5i rbv fiaaxaXiatibv 2O0OKXTJS iv by Tylor, Primitive Culture1, I p. 451 ff., are conclusive to show that the real pf y p x motive for the mutilation was fear of though that probably gives the general the ghost of a slain enemy. Kaibel on sense. Harles in Fabric. Bibl. Gr. II El. I.e. called attention to the strangep. xvi quoted from Siebenkees's papers ness of the assertion that the severed the following note : ' Electra et Troilus parts were strung together and fastened citantur in Msc. Angelicae Bibliothecae, jiiaffxaXifl-fliy?) TTOT4 ; ' but the clue does to the arm-pits, and holds that this cannot have been the origin of the name tiaffxa.not appear to have been followed up. Xw/ibs. We should rather understand Nauck thinks that the passage referred /iao-x<>.XLfrtv as ' to cut off the arm as far to is to be found in Apostol. n . 4 as the iiao-x&X-q,' with the purpose of (Paroem. II 516) iiacrxaXitrBijari TTOT4...

TPQIAOZ rendering the murdered man, or rather his ghost, which would inherit his bodily defects, powerless to execute revenge; afterwards it was generalized so as to apply to the other members. See also Wilamowitz on Aesch. Cho. p. 201. Rohde, however, argued forcibly in favour of the explanation of Aristophanes that the jxbpia., known as /uacrxa\(
259

a proposal to impale the corpse of Mardonius with the words: ' Such things are fitter for barbarians than for Greeks, and odious even in them.' To the same effect Moschion fr. 3 (FTG p. 813) Kevbv SavovTos apdpbs aUl£eti> SKIAV Ko\dfei.i>, 06 BavbvTas citrefik.

\ fSvTas Even as

a punishment for the living mutilation is rarely mentioned in Greek literature, and nearly always with abhorrence. The cases of Melanthius (Horn, x 475) a n ( i Deiphobus (Verg. Aen. 6.496) are exceptional. Elsewhere it is attributed to a mythical ogre like Echetus (Horn. 0-85), to Xerxes as a punishment inflicted on the Thracians (Aelian var. hist. 5. 11), and threatened to the Athenians (Aristid. 1 128), to the savage Scythians (Athen. J24 E), to the Colchian Aeetes in his threats against the Argonauts (Apoll. Rhod. 3. 378), or to the inhumanity of the tyrants (Plat. Gorg. 473 c). Of especial significance is Aesch. Sum. 186 ff., where oriental usages are referred to. Cf. fr. 528.

624 eAcuovrcu Horn. A 385 Kepai ayKae, addressed to Paris. Cf. Verg. Aen. 12. 99 semiviri Phrygis (sc. corpus loricamque), et foedare fi£\Tiov de Xa/iTrpiVercu. in pulvere crinis \ vibratos calido ferro The advantage of oil to the growth of murraqiie madentis. Cic. Sest. 18 (of the hair was recognized : Plat. Prot. 334 B Gabinius) imguentis adfluetts, calamiTO fkaiov...Tats OpiQv •KoKe^tuyrarov rats strata coma. Juv. 13. 165 (of the Tuiv aWbiv £yaie -K\I}V Tats rod avdp&irov, Germans) viadido torquentei?i cornua Tats be TOO avdpunrov apajybv teal TOJ aXXy cirro. From the comment of Aristarchus
Hesych. 11 p. 57 eXaioOrai 0pi£-

2o0oK\ijs TpmiXip. 'AptiXTapxos

pviratveTai,

625 6 2 5 Hesych. I p. 141 afi&aerar airb dpfiacnv and a/j.j3ai8i]i'. Possibly the TTJS d/iiju-eus, olovel ir0dfet (tr<paiiai cod.).Doric form (d,aij
ZO*OKAEOYI

260

626 626

awiax-n codd.: corr. M. Schmidt

Etym. M. p. 665, 50 6 2 6 Hesych. I p. 235 d-irlany T6(OV Ajriaici) • &1.01 5i yvfifi. drfiais (flijmus cod.: n e i Kvplut rb TOV irpofl&Tov p (cf. ib. p. 68, 21 ; p. 257, 47). (2) The corr. M. Schmidt) rh^a. 2O0OKX?}S Tp«£X\oi6v rijs fioTavt)* diriffKif yvpwb. Sii/ojs T6{O. ijyovv r6 \4TOS (prrjalv, & fia-

627 627 Hesych. 1 p. 242 airiarosBut there is no evidence to support the dirapdiriffTos, aTreiOfy. 2o
628

acras 6 2 8 Hesych. I p. 297 ao-as- (HXdif/aslfS\aifias. 2O0OKX?JS Tpu/Xy. Nauck proposed to delete 2p\alj/a.s : the less likely alternative would be to read euros and omit /3Xa^as. Perhaps, however, there

has been a conflation of two distinct glosses. The only other evidence for this Homeric word in tragedy is Bekk. anecd. p. 450, 33 aVar p\dfac oSras AitfX (fr. 417).

629 acroXoLKov 6 2 9 Hesych. I p. 301 a
261

TPQIAOI 630 ipieq 63O \

Hesych. II p. 192 ipicr)- SvXa.

Theocr. 25. 278 KOX afi v \ ipicos ivvaXlov Ta/tes

TtX

There is no doubt that &'7rXa is here used of defensive armour: so Horn. A 137 fdrp-qs 0' T\V icpbpuv Upvfia xpobs,

xf (Heracles is speaking of the lion's skin).

fp/cos

63I 6 3 1 According to Hesych. II p. 338 s.v. "lama, this word was employed by Soph, as fiapflapov dpr/vima. We are reminded of Aristophanes' allusion to

the Persae: Ran. 1029 6 x°P°s 5' evB&s ™ x e 'P' "Si £vyKpo6
632 632

Hesych. II p. 349 irjtos.. AXXa

teal dprjvov ffTj/jLaivet, ws 2o0o/c\^s UpwlXcp

Kai "low Evpvridai.s (fr. 12 p. 734 N.), us aiXivof, ictXe/ios. In the omitted words Hesych. explains that i7jtos was an epithet of Apollo : cf. O.T. 154, 1096. But it

is also an epithet of /?OTJ etc. when used for a cry of lamentation. So Eur. Phoen. 1036 ff. i-qi^wv fioav, I ir/cr/LOv fii\os | ixXXos a\X J eiridrdrvfe j SiaSoxct's ava irrtiklv, El.

1210. It must not be inferred from the gloss that Soph, used Irjtos as a noun.

633 6 3 3 Schol. Plat. rep. 566 D (H 8' oi l&fvovTi, /cat el /taXa TIS iroXe/M^oL. W e fiiWei;) yiteXXef ZoiKe, (paiverat, 5oK€?, UJS might therefore guess that the passage in vvv' irapa. h£ 2o0o/cXet TpuuXy [x^vet. the Troilns was parallel to Phil. 1256 Hesych. Ill p. 88 /x^XXec (patvercu, tome, These are puzzling statements, but we should hardly reject them as incredible. The intention is to quote from Sophocles an instance of ^eXXei with a sense entirely different from that in the i-epublic, and capable of being represented by txevei. Now, in the sense of delaying or holding back fiiWm and /u,&w almost coincide, as may be seen e.g. in Horn. I 318 ten} iiotpa

dXXa Kant TOI | ravrbv T65' Sxprj SpQvra KOV /t^XXot/r' £rt, or El. 318 ri&vros rj fj.£Wopros; The objection would be that the regular gloss for fdWu in this sense is (3pa8iji>a : see schol. L on //. cc, and Phot., Suid., Etym. M. etc. However, schol. rec. on Aesch. Prom. 654 gives ara^dWy in explanation of fitWeis, and the choice of yu^et here may have been influenced by the particular context.

634 opocrdyyau 634

Claudius Casilo irapa. rots 'ATTIKOIS p-qropai

eva quoted on fr. 183.

262

I04>0KAE0YI 635

of the shield' (cf. dtpfia KeKaivbv in Z 117). 635 Photius lex. p . 497, 3 aaicoSepfilrris (OK\?7$ TpwcXy. of fihv rbv otptv, been illustrated in connexion with fr. 286. ot Se GKib\i)Ka (add. Bachm. The tradition of the note in Hesychius anecd.) TO Sipixara SifaSlovra. afi.ti.vov Sk rbv iirl T$ Sipixan xaX/cde ?x°''Ta< *<%/>' has suffered confusion : I suggest that we Scrov TO. crdKrj inixahica. Cf. Hesych. IV should read < ol' fiev > 8
TYMTTANIITAI Most critics, Nauck says, 'de argumento non constat.' however, have accepted Welcker's inference that the TvfnravicrTai was concerned with the legend of Phineus, even if they have not gone so far as he did in identifying it with one of the two plays named after him. Fr. 645 proves that the second marriage of Phineus was mentioned by Sophocles in this play, although of course this might have been an incidental allusion, like that in the A ntigone (966 ff.). But it is remarkable that of the other eight fragments remaining two clearly relate to the ancestry of Phineus (637, 643), and that one of these, which contains a pronoun of the first person plural, mentions the Sarpedonian cave, to which Orithyia was carried by Boreas. It seems unlikely that these facts are to be attributed entirely to accident. Possibly Cleopatra was the speaker of fr. 6371, but there is 1 Or, as Hiller v. Gaertringen (p. 59) prefers, the pronoun may refer to the sons of Orithyia.

TPQIAOZ—TYMTTANIZTAI

263

nothing else in the fragments which gives any clue to the probable action of the play. For the various possibilities see Introductory Note to the Phineus. The title undoubtedly describes the chorus, and was applied to the devotees of Dionysus or Cybele. Cf. Eur. Bacch. 58 (Dionysus speaks) alpeaOe rairL'yjcopi iv iroXeu <$>pvywv \ TVfnrava, 'Pea? re /MrjTpb'i ifJ.d #' evprj[A,aTa. TVfiirav.a (Diet. Ant. II 914)

were small drums, in the form of (1) a tambourine, or (2) a kettledrum. They were covered with hides (Eur. Hel. 1347 Tvirava... ftupcroTevfj), and were beaten with the hand. Because the beating of timbrels is occasionally spoken of with a certain degree of contempt (Ar. Lys. 388, Dem. 18. 284), it does not follow that Boeckh (Tr. Gr. princ. p. 129) and Hermann (de Aesch. Niobe, p. 4) were justified in concluding that this was a satyr-play. But, if the Thracian Salmydessus was the scene of the play, a chorus of Bacchic devotees would not be out of place. For the connexion of Dionysus with Thrace see the evidence collected by Kern in Pauly-Wissowa v 1011 f, and cf. Hdt. 5. 7, Eur. Hec. 1267. The title is clearly suggestive of foreign ritual: cf. Apul. de deo Socr. 14 p. 22, 8 Aegyptia numina gaudent plangoribus, Graeca choreis, barbara autem strepitu cymbalistarum et tympanistarum et choraularum. 636 €l> (f)€V, Tl TOVTOV ^dp/AOL fXel^OV OLV XaySoiS TOV yrjs iTTL\jjavo~avTa xdd' inrb o~Teyrj TTVKVTJS

a.Kovo'a.i t/;a/caSos ev8ovarj

pevi ;

6 3 6 . 1
Stob. Jlor. 59. 12 (iv p. 402,

Akominatos

(Archbishop

of

Athens

13 Hense) ~O(poK\£ovs TvinraviffTQi' (TUJV Travurruv M). ' Tt TOVTOV...<j>pevl.' v. 1 is

C. 1200 A.D.) I p . 27, 13 tpeu
quoted without the name of either poet or play by Plut. prooem. vit. Timol. p. 235 ( = p. 255, formerly treated as Aem. Paull. 1). Part of v. 2 and v. 3 are quoted by Cic. Att. 2. 7. 4 cupio istorum naufragia ex terra intueri; cupio,

appears to refer to this line ; and he may have become acquainted with it through a source independent of Plutarch. —(j>«v, ' a h ! ' , admirantis, as in Eur. Hclid. 535, Phoen. 1740, and often. 2 f. The general sentiment is that of

ut ait tuus amicus Sophocles, 'K&V virb...
Zenob. 3. 95 (Paroem. I 81) i^a.vTT\% \evaaw TOVJXOV KO.KOV &XKOV l ^ o i r a , who

1 See cr. n. It seems more likely that irmi was a later addition after ipev ev had disappeared than that Valckenaer (diatr. p. 194) was right in accepting Stobaeus' text with Tovde for TOVTOV. Papageorgius points out that Michael

refers for QAvTys to Plat. Phaerfr. 244 E; and in its application to seafaring, which is implied by -y^s iiriijjaiaavTa., is best illustrated by the famous lines of Lucretius (2. i f . ) : suave mart magno turbantibus aequora ventis \ e terra magnum alterius

IOOKAEOY£

264

spectarelaborem. Archipp. fr. 43 (1 688 K.) lecto, where the last clause has the same effect. Starkie on Vesp. 49 collects the s i)6ii TJJK. $d\a.TTar dirb rrjs yijs bpotv, | u>, ItyJTep, (arl firj TrKiovra. /MjSa/ioC. Hor. examples in Aristophanes, but I cannot follow him in attributing the idiom to Epist. 1. 11. 10 Neftunum procul e terra spectare furentem. For the following anacoluthon. For the corruption of KAI9 see Cobet, N. L. p. 101. Blomfield's conwords they quote Tibull. 1. 1. 45 ff. quam iuvat immites ventos audire cuban- jecture iirnj/avaaL re is thus unnecessary. — iruKviis KTC., ' to hear the patter of the tem I et dominant tenero continuisse sinu \ rain-drops with slumbering sense.' P. aut, gelidas hibernus aquas cum fuderit Shorey in Class. Phil, v 83 ff. argues Auster, \ securzim sovmos imbre inthat «I8OWpevi is only a convenient vante sequi. See especially the simile in Ap. Rhod. 2. 1085 ff. us S' birbre periphrasis for a modal adverb, ' sleepily,' W5?;s TrvKLi»7]i> itpdrjKe 'x&ha^a.p \so£Kto speak. He has collected lists of p dvd T' acrrv KO.1 olida, roi S' virb similar datives accompanied by adjectives and participles (so faxy, ie0v/jqi /q, yvdfuri yfi xP> vodi rpbirtp pp, T&XV XV> PV; fi &PV I dirpotpdTws, dXXdTex"?! and many others) with the object Trplv tKaprivavro /jAXaBpov.—For KOTa, of showing that little or no stress is laid which is nothing but a strengthened elm, on the noun, and that its appearance is following a participle, cf. Ar. Lys. 560 merely a stylistic artifice. He has done Srav aaviS' ?x w " K a ' Topr/6va TIS Kq.r' good service in noticing the tendency, (jjviJTaL KopaKivovs, Eq. 391 d W 6'/AOJSbut it is extremely difficult to estimate oSros rotovTos ujf airavTa rbv fiiov \ K^T' exactly the subtlety of intention which &vi)p ISo^ev efoou, Plat. Gorg. 457 B ikv , may have been present to various writers 5^ pijToptKos yevbfjievbs TIS Kq.Ta rafrry rrjat different times. Each case must be Svvdfici. Kal TTJ T£XVXI dSiKy, Blaydes on judged on its own merits, and here at Ar. Nub. 624. H., who quotes Av. (s"j\ any rate I do not feel that cppevi is otiose : dXX' uxrirep <(Jou VT] Al' diroKi\j/avTa XPV cf. | Aesch. Ag. 287 ^pi^oiatis (ppevSs. airb rrjs /ce^aX^s rb \£[i[Aa Kq.6' otirtx) H. renders :
637 ls 8' iv avrpoLs, ivda %apTnqha>v irerpa 637

Bergk : aarpois cod.

6 3 7 Herodian w. fiov. Xef. p. 9, 11 for the legend. Cf. Ant. 983 rri\eirbpoi.s "2apirr)8ibi> '2apn)S6i>os, efre 6 7fpws, ei're 5' ij ev arrpois Tpd<pr\ 6v4\\at<Tii> iv Tairirpa, etre r) d/trij, eiVe T) V?IuXairij Se avv ivrvn, rli Si oi &nr&) | tirrdnvxov Bop^ao irapa
TYMTTANIZTAI

265

638 xe XaXScuos Te /ecu %vpoiv 6 3 8 Steph. Byz. p. 680, 14 XaX3aiot ...eitrl 5e*Kai XaXSatbt tdvos TrXtjaiov r?)s KoX%i5os. SO^OKX^S Tu/uracicrrais' K iX^os ...ffoos.' These peoples are grouped together as inhabitants of the farthest east. Originally Chaldaea was the name of a strip of coast-land to the north-west of the Persian Gulf; but by the majority of classical writers it was used as syno-

nymous with Assyria: see Baumstark in Pauly-Wissowa III 2044. Dittenberger in Hermes XLII 212 remarks that this is the earliest example of HtSpos in place of ~Zbpim. He holds that the shortened form arose from the compound AevKbwpos (cf. iiriroTrSTafios: IVTTOS Trord/uor, etc.), and thinks there may be some significance in the fact that this passage refers to the northern Syrians.

639 639

Hesych. I p. 44 ahjixov OVK bvra. 2O0OK\?)S TvfnraviaTais. jp which is not recorded elsewhere, was apparently synonymous with &TT65TIHOS. For similar doublets see on

fr. 558. If (SSTJ/HOS expressed nothing more than a temporary absence from home, analogy does not support the usage. We should rather expect it to be applied to an exile, like axoXis and deeVrios.

64O 64O Hesych. II p. 510 KOjiiiferai • spond. He finds the earliest occurrence vofj-ifrerai, \eyerai. 6'irep iariv i\ Tu/ZTram- of this thought in Aesch. Pers. 657 Beojx-rjcrrpicus. Kock (1 806) assigns this to the <JTO>p 5' €KIK\7II7K€T0 H4p(TCLlS, 6eO/XTf(TTttjp Tv/iTdi/iarai (or 1vixiro.viaTpi.ai) of Auto- 5' (oKeii, and adds the following list of crates, and there is nothing to determine illustrations : Eur. Ion 309 rod deov whether he is right as against those who K€K\Tjp.ai douXos elfii r', w £fp'?t Dio have claimed it for Sophocles. Kock's Chrys. 56. 5 wciPTes yap OVTOI, oBs ai only ground for making the attribuvuv ovofiafeis, paaiXeis ZKOKOVVTO Kai •qtray, tion is that, inasmuch as the title 38. 19 ravTa £v rols KaKols Tarrenu Kai iv/j.irai'ivTpia.i is more appropriate than ovras <ws> #%« Kai vevbixwrrai Kai iv/iiravurTal to the fragment (fr. 1) quoted KaXefrai ra/cd, Phot, epist. 239 et)ffe/3?)s by Ael. nat. an. 12. 9, it is likely to be fxera rod elvat Kai dvafj-aferai, Xen. mem. the true title of Autocrates' play. In the 1. 1. 20 ofd TIS av KOX \tyuv Kai wpaTruv fragment referred to (fr. 1, 3 f.), where ch) re Kai vofxi^oiTO ei) Lucian de dea Syr. I KaXhrai been corrected to h (Musurus): but this Syip^i, Kai £ITTII> iprj T7)S Hpj;s, paras. 44 would introduce an unusual formula of rbv 'A^tXX^a, ouirep E56K€L re Kai rjv rb quotation, and it is obvious that the aaifxa yevvaLoTaros, Alciphr. 3. 44 rat/Tys whole gloss is corrupt. I infer from {sc. TUXV>) 0 TUX&V ribvs ten Kai vo[j.i£eTai, H.'s notes that he thought the original Plut. brut. rat. ut. 7 p. 990 A ri fiiv yap was something like <.iori>- KavotAdfeTcu- yXdrra.., yviifxuiv tarl re Kai Xe'yerai, <:i yoyniferai 17 Xeyerai oirep Epict. man. 15 d£tws detoL re r\aav Kai ?<m, i.e. ' is thought or called what it eXiyovTO, Cic. Att. I. 15. 1 praeter really is,' where name and nature correceteros (biKtWvves et sumus et habcviur.

IOOKAEOYI

266

641 other certain instance of the word dverws (or perhaps rather avh-ws, as Housman, and before him Lobeck, Parahp. p- 481, Phavorinus corrected the explanation to ava.TeTaii.ivus, and so the gloss is printed preferred); but Lobeck (Phryn. p. 70) was probably right in restoring it in by the editors of Hesych. and Soph., Hesych. I p . 313 aTeruis' a.poi>Tl(TTws. regardless of the fact that averus ought In the new papyrus of the Aetia of to mean exactly the opposite of dcorcraCallimachus (Ox. Pap. VII p. 26) at fitvas. Tucker (6^. R. x v i n 431) prov. 39 the MS seems to have ij 8' averus posed arevus, and the same correction Tav itcakvipev i-iros, but this is obviously was made independently by Housman impossible and has been variously (C.Q. IV 117). I should prefer to read avaireTTTaijLtvajs in the sense of ' openly, emended: see the remarks of Platt (C. Q. frankly,' for dvaireT&vvv/ju is a common IV 112), who proposes K&veK&Xvij/ev, and Housman (I.e.). word in scholiastic Greek. There is no 641

Hesych. 1 p. 197 dcerus" dva-

TeTa\/i.ivws.

2o0oicX?)S

Tv/nraviiTTais.

642 OLVTL(TTp€(j)O}

6 4 2 Hesych. I p. 215 ^ 2 0\ ) T The only recorded meaning of dxrafifi is 'to require an equivalent,' which does not suit dvTi(rrp4<j>«. The usage of the simple verb might justify us in supposing that it also meant' to make (or deem) equivalent'; and in that sense it might have been used to explain &vTWTpi(pui (\6yov) = ' to retort,' since dpTafiw could hardly be

intransitive. But I believe the true reading is derifofi, and that Soph, used dvTiGTpi<j>uv for ' to be opposed t o ' or ' to correspond to.' The idea that ivrl^oos was solely Ionic and poetical is probably incorrect. It was a technical trade term with carpenters and masons; and there is plenty of evidence of its survival in Hellenistic and Byzantine times.

643 8pa,Kav\o<; 643

Etym. M. p. 287, 14 and Suid.

s.v. opaKavXos. 2O0OKXT5S Tvp.wa.vurTais. eirel r\ 'Adrjva doKei Tap' CLVTOLS av\t
The first explanation of this obscure word refers to the story of Erichthonius, whom Athena was said to have enclosed in a chest immediately after his birth, and to have entrusted to the guardianship of the three daughters of Cecrops. She

charged them strictly that they should on no account open the chest. Nevertheless, impelled by curiosity, one or more of the three sisters, Aglauros, Pandrosos, and Herse, examined the box, and saw the child with one or two (according to others) serpents coiled around him. According to one account, the offenders were killed by the serpent; but others said that they were visited with frenzy in consequence of their disobedience to the goddess, and threw themselves down the rock of the Acropolis. The chief authorities are Eur. Ion 21 ff., 271 ff. ; Ov. Met. 2. 552 ff.; Apollod. 3. 189. The second explanation mentions the association of his daughters with Cecrops, for whom

267

TYMTTANIITAI

metaplasm in -n- stems given by Brugmann, Comp. Gr. II p. 27 E. tr. But the third view, one of the sisters served the compound ' snake-dwelling' can with the goddess as attendant on her sacred difficulty be forced to bear the meaning serpent which lived on the Acropolis : ' living with a snake'; and we may susfor the oUovpbs 67)S, 'ArXayevrfS, the mother of Cleopatra, was the daughter of Erechtheus (Ant. 981 f.). and the like. See also the examples of

cf. A r . Vesp. 438 iS K4KPO^ ijpws aval, ra Tpbs woSiov LpaKovrlSri. According to

644 644

Athen. 176 F, for which see on fr. 450.

645 EilSodeav ('iSaicw) e7rey7j/xez/.J 645

Schol. Soph. Ant. 981 /xerd Be

TQV KXeO7rdTpaj ddvarov iiriy^jxev (sc. Phineus) 'Idaiav rijv Aapddvov, Kara 8i TLVas "StlBodiav TTJV KdS^ou ade\
< T O I ) S > rijs KXeoirdrpas TrafSos Iv Taipifi Kadeip^ev, ws 5^ ripes tpaaiv OTL /caTe^eiJtraro auruiv are 5rj ireipaadpTwv avrijv e*(p' oh airarydels 6 Qivuvs afxtpor^povs ru
(3. 2 0 6 ) ' TLV£S 8e Iffropoxiaiv

6TL Trepiovcrav TTJV K-Xedirarpav 6 iyei)s iK^i^X-rjKev Kai TT\V 'ISa/ap iwiyqfj.€v, ij 8e 6pyLtj6ei
This passage is so important that it requires to be set out at length; but it is impossible to determine on the evidence which it affords taken by itself how much of the story and which version of it were included in the Tympanistae. For the difficult questions involved see Introductory Note to the Phineus (p. 313). Here it is enough to point out that the scholiast refers to three different versions of the blinding of the Phineidae, according

to which the agent in the savage deed was either (1) the stepmother Idaea (or Idothea), (2) Phineus, or (3) Cleopatra. The first two are repeated in schol. Ap. Rhod. 1. 211. According to schol. Apoll. Rhod. 2. 178 (fr. 704) Sophocles adopted (2). But in the Antigone (973— 978) he clearly follows (1), not only in describing the outrage as inflicted by the stepmother, but also in referring to the imprisonment of the sons. Moreover, if Jebb is right in inferring that the fate of Cleopatra was the subject of the comparison made in the Antigone, the poet has there in part introduced the version of (3); for according to (1) and (2) [p.era 5e TOV KXeoirdrpas

BdvaTov] Cleopatra

was already dead. The schol. appears to say that Idothea was the name of the stepmother in the Tympanistae; but, as there is definite evidence that Sophocles elsewhere if not here called her Idaea (see on fr. 704), G. Wolff's suggestion that rjs goes back to 'Idaiav has met with some favour.

268

204>0KAE0YZ TYNAAPEQI

Until quite recently only a single quotation (fr. 646) was referred to the title Tyndareus. Welcker accordingly conjectured (p. 216) that' Tyndareus was a character in the Aletes, to which play the lines should be attributed. Ribbeck (p. 268) took a similar view, but preferred to assign the fragment to the Hermione; and Bernhardy (Gr. Litt? II. 2 p. 334) thought that the lines bore the stamp of" a later period and should be regarded as the work of the younger Sophocles. Now that a second quotation has come to light in the newly-discovered Photius (fr. 647), the probability of error is proportionately diminished. Wilamowitz1, however, still thinks that Bernhardy's judgment of fr. 646 was correct, and Hense suggests that the real Tyndareus fragment and the lemma to which the words quoted belong have been lost from the text of Stobaeus. Tyndareus is not a character whose own fortunes are likely to have been made the subject of a play; for there is nothing dramatic in the story of his banishment, as related by Pausan. 3. 1. 4, and Apollod. 3. 124 f. He rather became notorious owing to the evil deeds of his daughters : Eur. Or. 540 iyco Be raXXa [laicapios TTe
avrjp,

TTXTJV e? Ovyarepa'i'

rovro

8' OVK evSat-

fiovdij. This passage suggests that fr. 646 refers to a time when the prosperity of Tyndareus was impaired in consequence of the sorrows of his descendants, and the allusion to old age in fr. 647 points in the same direction. One legend made him the accuser of Orestes in his trial at Athens (Apollod. epit. 6. 2$)\ Tyndareus was the title of a tragedy by Nicomachus, for whom see Haigh, Tragic Drama, p. 469. 646 ev Trpdo-aovTos oXySumi ru^as

ov yjpr)

TTOT

dS

Trplv avT<£ TravreXws 77S77 /3tos Of /cat Te\euT~q
646.

3 8<,eKTT(f>a.8rj N a u c k : SieKTepavdri codd. | dpd/tov H . : pioi> codd.

6 4 6 Stob. flor. 105. 3 (IV p . 928, 5 Hense) 2o0o/cWous Tvvd&peus. 'oi XPV

/Zr/jrf. 865 TOP eirvxelv SOXOVVTO. IIT\ {-qKovv, irplv Hv | Qavbvr tby TIS- ws i
...Ti.Se.' For the genuineness of the fragment see Introductory Note. 1—6 No one must be pronounced happy before his death : so insecure is human fortune. To the same effect Eur.

where see n. for the famous saw of Solon: see also Jebb on 0. T. 1529. For the instability of wealth see on fr. 106. 2 f. pCos with filov following has naturally been suspected : hence Blom-

1 2

Sitzungsb. Berl. Akad. 1907 p. 6. See also Introductory Note to Erigone, 1 p. 173.

TYNAAPEQI

269

iv y a p /3pa^el KadeiXe KQjXCya) ^p TrdfjurXovTov oXfiov Saiju,oj/os /ca/cou Socrt?, OTCLV fieracTrj teal dtols 80/07 TaSe. 4 KoXiytp S, Kal oXiyip M,

Kav 6\ly
Meineke, K&Xiyov xp°v<>" Enger, fort. xdX codd.: corr. Gesner

aKpty coni. Bergk, K&KLyip 5 Trap trhovTOv vel Trap TTX

field proposed xp6pos> Bergk 5T6TJUOS. and cohere with the preceding words, and F. W. Schmidt rpifios. But it is more that it must have been wrongly attached likely that filov is faulty, and H.'s con- to the present fragment. Taking the jecture Spopiov is the best remedy that has latter criticism first, I understand /ca/eds been suggested. He quotes in support dalfiuv as the subject of [MTOIOTTJ, applied of it fr. 856, schol. Ar. Lys. 601 STi<j>avo%here, as in Plat. rep. 553E, to that which ws rbv fiiov SLTjyuvujfifroLS, Epicrates fr. 3, comes into being as the result of change. 18 (II 283 K.) iirel Se 56Xix<w roU treaiv The form of expression is familiar to ijdri rp^xei, Paul 2 Tim. 4. 7, Act. Apost. tragedy: cf. Aesch. Pers. 161 el TI pjq •20. 24, 13. 25. Earlier suggestions were 5ai/j.ojv iraXaws vvv [/.ede&TTjlce a*TpaT(fj, TeXevr-qaas ipavy (Schneidewin),TeXeurijcrj; ib. 944 daifiuv yap 65' av fteTarpoTOS /caXws (Heimsoeth), reXeur'^o'avr' tdrjs e7r' i/Aoi (where Paley rightly explains (Meineke) : the last-named scholar suba5), Theb. 693 e7rei balp.wv | \rj/j.aTos aS sequently gave the preference to ircu-reXfis rpoiraia xpovia fiera\- | Xa/crds iVws av OV0 rfdr] ($iov...Te\€vrr]dr} XP ^-— I adopt l\6oi., Eur. Ale. 912 ixeraTrlirTovTOS SaiNauck's SieKirepaBrj, as the change is in- p\ovo$, Tro. 102 /j.eroL^aXXofj.^vov 5al/j.ovos. considerable, and SuKircpdu fiiov occurs It is not always easy to seize the exact in Eur. Supp. 954. It should be observed force of 5aifj.wv, which was rapidly also that irepav is used in the parallel moving towards the impersonal sense: passages 0. T. 1529, Eur. Andr. 102.— see on fr. 653. But SaCp-ovos KaKoii For the subjunctive after irptv without w Soo-is here is not merely ' the dispensation see Jebb on Phil. 917. of a cruel fate.' In these words we can hardly fail to see the expression of a V > s 4 kv fipaxct...KuXtyp XP° "! ^ open belief in the subjection to the control to obvious objection, and, if written by of a mysterious and destructive power, Sophocles, belongs to one of his least which is sometimes imagined as perhappy moments. Dindorf quotes Euseb. meating its victim (cf. KaKodat/iovav : so devi. ev. 3 p. 89 A 01 & 6\ly<>) Kai f5po.%eL I should incline to explain Ai. 1214 Xpovtp TT}V wa&aP TT€pidpafj.ov/J.€VOL olKovp.^i.va.ra.1
W.

cmov I wpbs IXTJ SvaSai/xovi. fioipa;

Pers.

Schmidt justly remarks, does not defend 35^ VP&v P-&1 w decnroiva, rou iravros the text. The same critic argues in KaKov I (paveis akaorwp rj /caKds SaLfuov favour of the adoption of rcthXiyip TTOVQ, wodiv). I will only add that the wellquoting 0. C. 1341 /3pax«
270

S04>0KAE0YI

XpwrTai teal KoXaarais <*Jri TOVS Avairlovs KO.1 aSUovs avdptbirovs. If these considerations are recognized, there is the less difficulty in 86
be dispelled by a reference to Eur. Hipp. 1433 f. (quoted on fr. 665), and that the gifts of the ' gods' may be evil is constantly laid down (Headlam, On editing Aeschylus, p. 89).—rdSe refers to the action of ra.0e?\e.

647 6 4 7 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 89, 20 a/i- ^Xvonreiv, according to Harpocr. p. 14, /!Xi«£aa- SO^OKXTJS TvvSdpeif 'a^§\v<paei 18 n. Pollux 2. 51 similarly states that ...yqpois.' d/i^XuiiTToiv is better than a/xfi\vwir6s, &nPAv4>aetv, not elsewhere recorded, is which is TroirjTiKdrepoy. Cf. fr. TOOL a poetical variant for a./jLpXvibTTew, which Wilamowitz, doubting the existence of was preferred by Attic writers to d/t- such a verb, proposed dfip\v<pah.

TYPQ A AND B In Horn, ft 120 Tyro is mentioned as one of the einrXoicaytuSe? 'A^atat, who belonged to an earlier generation. In X, 235 Odysseus includes her in the list of famous women in the underworld, whose spirits he questioned, as they came to drink the blood from the trench. Tyro was the daughter of Salmoneus and the wife of Cretheus his brother. Being enamoured of the Thessalian1 river-god Enipeus, she used to pay frequent visits to the bank of the stream. Here Poseidon wooed her in the likeness of Enipeus, and begat by her Pelias and Neleus, who both became mighty chieftains, Pelias in Iolcus, and Neleus in Pylos. And to Cretheus Tyro bore Aeson, Pheres, and Amythaon. Lucian (dial. mar. 13) uses the Homeric account without adding anything to it; but it scarcely contains the elements of a dramatic story. According to Apollod. 1. 90—92, Tyro, the daughter of Salmoneus and Alcidice, while she was being brought up in the house of Cretheus, her paternal uncle, became enamoured of Enipeus. The sequel fell out as in Homer; but, when Tyro's twins were born, she concealed the birth, and exposed them. A herd of horses passed by, and a mare trod on one of the infants, leaving a livid mark on its face. The herdsman reared the children, giving to the injured child the name Pelias (from ireXiBv6<:), and to the other that of Neleus. When 1 There is nothing in Homer connecting Tyro with the Elean Enipeus: for the other view see Strabo 356. The Thessalian Enipeus is specified in Prop. 1 13 2 r 3 19 13

TYNAAPEQI—TYPQ

271

they grew up, they discovered their mother, and put to death her stepmother Sidero, by whom Tyro had been ill-treated. Sidero had escaped from them to the sanctuary of Hera, but Pelias, who subsequently continued to slight the power of the goddess, cut her down at the altar. The scene is still Thessaly, as is proved by the constant connexion of Cretheus with Iolcus1. Diodorus (4. 68), who eliminates all the romantic details, locates the intrigue with Poseidon in Elis at a time subsequent to the death of Salmoneus, and makes the marriage with Cretheus later still. Schol. Horn. K 334 and Eustathius (Od. p. 1681, 52) add to the story of Pelias' disfigurement that the other child was suckled by a bitch who had lost her puppies. Aelian (y.h. 12. 45) says that Pelias was reared by a mare. The circumstances of the children's exposure and their subsequent recognition recall the legend of Romulus and Remus; and Trieber (Rh. Mzts. XLIII 569 ff.) held that Sophocles was the ultimate source from which Diocles of Peparethos derived the details of the Roman myth2. From this rather scanty material3 we are left to deduce the plot of Sophocles with such assistance as is provided by certain external evidence relating to the play. From schol. Eur. Or. 1691 we learn that the recognition took place in the concluding scene (Kara TO re\o<;). Further, Aristotle {poet. 16. I454b 25) states that it was effected by means of the cradle in which the babies were exposed. This incident was the subject of a jesting allusion in the Lysistrata of Aristophanes (fr. 657). - The result of Tyro's ill-treatment by Sidero was made visible to the spectators by the actor's mask : Pollux 4. 141 (among the examples of rd eiccriceva irpoacoira) Tvpco ireXiSvij T /j.rjTpvia'; St&^poD? TrXrjyats* Treirovdev. H e r disfigure-

ment contrasted markedly with the cream-white complexion, which had earned for her the name of Tyro : see on fr. 648. Similarly the effect of fr. 659 is much more striking when we recall that her hair was one of the chief ornaments of Tyro's beauty. Horn. /3 119, referred to above, may be merely formal, but such is hardly the case with Pind. Pyth. 4. 136 TupoO? epaI

We cannot suppose that the tragedies of Astydamas (Suid.) and Carcinus (TGF p. 799) had much effect upon the tradition, 1 Apollod. 1. 96, 107. The version of Apollodorus is clearly an unsuccessful conflation of two different stories, rpe^o/xhri irapci. Kpjjffei is an attempt to reconcile the tradition that Tyro was wife of Cretheus with the essential requirement of the story that she was persecuted by her stepmother. 2 See also Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa V 797. 3 Nothing of importance is added by Libanius or Nonnus ap. Westermann, Mythogr. pp. 369, 384. * There is no necessity to follow Nauck in reading TrAijyeiffa.

272

IOd>OKAEOYI

and, in view of the dearth of literary evidence, Welcker not unreasonably illustrated Sophocles by the help of a Cyzicene epigram: A.P. 3. 9 iv rm ® IIeA./a? ical N^Xev? iXkeXdgevvTat,, 01 TlocretSwi'o? 7rat8e?, etc hecrfjL&v TTJV eavr&v [iTjTepa pvofxevot, rjv irpdar)!) 6 Trarrjp fiep SaX/u-wvev? Bid rrjv
yevera

TO>S'

vTroTaaaofxevav

Engelmann2, however, repudiated the relevance to Sophocles of this epigram ; and relied on archaeological evidence to prove that the recognition by Tyro of her sons took place near a fountain to which she had been sent to fetch water. Even if he is wrong, Welcker's explanation of fr. 660 as referring to Tyro's prisonhouse is highly improbable. It is much more likely that it describes an ill-omened incident3, which interrupted the progress of a festal banquet. Possibly the same feast is referred to in fr. 666, from which Welcker inferred that Salmoneus entertained the two sons on their arrival. New evidence has recently come to light, which bears on the circumstances of the recognition; for we can hardly doubt that Menand. Epitr. 108—116 refers to the Tyro of Sophocles: redeaaai Tpayq>8ov<;, olS' on, teal ravTa Kare^eK iravra. Nr/\ia nvd UeXiav T' iiceivovs evpe •jrpecrj3vjr)<; durjp ai7ro\o9, e%wv olav eyco vvv 8jd ft)? 8' rjcrQeT aiiTOVS ovras avrov \eyet, TO irpayfi, ft)? evpev, a>? eSaJKe S' avrol<; wrjpihiov y p etj ov [ictOovTes irdvra rd Ka6' atJroii? cra<j>do<; iyevovro /SatrtXet? ol TOT' ovres aiiroXoi.

Here there are two facts which appear to be at variance with the rest of our information : (1) aliroXos contradicts Apollodorus, and appears to exclude the etymological explanation of the name Pelias. In this respect we may well prefer Menander to Apollodorus, for there is nothing to show that the latter drew upon a tragic source. (2) Trrjpi.Siov picr/jt,dTcov seems to exclude recognition by means of the o-icdr). The statements previously quoted concerning the o-Kd<j>r) are such as we cannot reject; but it is not necessarily inconsistent with them to suppose that the 1 Stadtmueller's text. Wilamowitz (ap. Engelmann, p. 50 n.) proposed XeiJtro-u in v. 3. 2 Arch. Studien, p. 40 ff. 3 So also Engelmann, p. 46, and Hartung, p. 74.

TYPQ

273

foster-father of the youths, when parting with them, gave them the crepundia which he had found in the axafyrj for the purpose of establishing their rank. Observe that the change of condition is Menander's point, and the aicafyr) might well have appeared an inadequate token of their origin. Engelmann seems to be justified in inferring from Aristophanes that Poseidon appeared at the end of the play as #eo? amb fiTjxavrjsHis appearance was necessary to the complete vindication of Tyro; for we must suppose that Salmoneus had acquiesced in the cruelty of Sidero 1in consequence of the disgrace which had befallen his daughter . Further, Engelmann is certainly right in maintaining that Salmoneus was still alive, though frs. 664 and 665 might be otherwise explained than with reference to the discovery of his error. But the power of a stepmother over the children of her husband's former wife ceases of necessity when their father dies. For similar reasons we ought to conclude that Tyro was not already the wife of Cretheus, when she was seduced by Poseidon. Here at least we may follow Diodorus, with whom Sophocles probably also agreed in making Elis the scene of the action2. The confused narrative of Apollodorus seems to have been influenced by a desire to adhere to the Thessalian Enipeus, although he did not venture to assert that Salmoneus and Sidero were living in Thessaly. The marriage with Cretheus must therefore have been subsequent to the rehabilitation of Tyro, and Engelmann plausibly suggests that Poseidon ordered Salmoneus to betroth his daughter to his younger brother. So far we have attempted to form some notion of the scope and progress of the play composed on the theme of the sorrows which befell Tyro as the result of her union with Poseidon. We should expect it to contain an exposition of Tyro's unhappiness and Sidero's cruelty, the arrival of the young men, their meeting with Salmoneus, their recognition of their mother, the punishment of Sidero, and the final appearance of Poseidon. But there is conclusive evidence that Sophocles wrote two plays bearing this title. What then was the subject of the second play ? Welcker had no hesitation in holding that it was nothing but a revised edition of the first, and Dindorf agreed with him. Engelmann has recently revived a suggestion formerly made by Hartung 3 that the subject of the second Tyro is to be found in Hygin. fab. 60 (cf. ib. 239, 254), which has already been abstracted in the Introductory Note to the Sisyphus, and, in order to fill the lacuna in the text, he supposes that Sisyphus avenged himself 1 See A. P- 3. 9 (supra). P. II.

- Cf. fr. 649, 39.

3

p. 77. l 8

274

by persuading Salmoneus to imitate Zeus. Another possibility is that the tragedy comprised the earlier history of Tyro, and the circumstances of her betrayal. In that case fr. 653 would be appropriate to the concealment of Tyro's lot, echoing the command of Poseidon in \ 251 vvv 8' epxev "7>o? B(S/j.a- KCU iaxeo A"?^' bvofir)vr)s. Neither Welcker's explanation that the words were spoken by one of the sons in the recognition-scene, nor Engelmann's that Salmoneus asked that his mistake should not be published, seems to be entirely satisfactory. But on the general question Nauck's verdict is hardly to be gainsaid : ' differentiam (fabularum) rimari nunc non licet.' Ribbeck1 thinks that the anonymous Nelei carmen was largely concerned with this subject. The Tyro was probably produced not long before the Aves (fr. 6 54 ).

648 \evKov avrr/v <SS' inaCBevcrev yaXa 6 4 8 06 XeuKov Welcker, XCVKOP (Xeu/riji/ Cobet) yap Brunck, \6KCLOV olim Nauck cSS' Welcker: 85' codd., OVK Brunck 6 4 8 Erotian gloss. Hippocr. p. io8, 6 •iraideiav vvv TTJV irai5oTpo
H o r n . X 235 TaijTTjv iirwvufiws oOrw
of Propertius fail to point out the signiTyro od' iiraldevcre ydXa.' ' Since no IleXias of ficance of the epithet in Candida Soph, is mentioned elsewhere, Boettiger (1. 28. ,51). This explanation is unquesconjectured that it was another name for tionably right, but was anticipated by the 'Pifori/toi, and Hermann that it was Engelmann (p. 49) for exactly the same an error for. iv nijXei. But a detail is reasons.—For ciraCSevo-cv as the equivarecorded which points elsewhere : Pelias lent of gdpetpep cf. Hesych. 111 p. 254 TrcuSefej/- rpi(peiv, 7rai5orpo0e?c. Cobet was the son of Tyro, who derived her name from her complexion, white as the (Mnem. IX 84) quoted Nausicrates fr. 2, II 295 K. at %avdoxp5>Tes as nXvdiov Ai'faiproverbial cheese: Diod. exc. 6. 7. 5 e 6 SaX/xwvevs ^ X Svyaripa Tvpili, I)TIS ciKos I itaa&v apio-ras iv rdirms TraiSeierai, 81a rr\v XivKOT-ujra Kai rty rod ffw/iaros and Juvenal's (15. 70) terra malos homines /AaXaK6rijTa ravTrjS rrjs irpoa'qyopias rinunc educat atque pusillos. Tvpii was reuxe- Since Pelias was Tyro's son, it thus a fem. hypocoristic like 'Txpii, 'A0pci, is likely that Tyro is referred to in the and ~El5
Rom. Trag. p. 620.

TYPQ

275

649

fr. (a) col. i airav

]£a>crav [

fr. (b)

p j

ovS' av ets

e\9oi

. VCTTOV ] ] . v TTOT

fr. (c)

jncov

frs. (a) and (c) col. ii ~\TOV

X p

f

f

[

]

\_. .]reray/u,[e]i'a airoiv y

} /3pa\_ ] . Tres Xoyots ia.fi d p a a>Secnro^ Lva ].

6 4 9 These scraps of papyrus from the wrappings of a mummy were published by Grenfell and Hunt in Hibeh Papyri, I p. 17, and dated approximately at B.C. 280—240. Blass ascribed the fragments to the Tyro of Sophocles on the following grounds : (1) The mention of the Alpheus in v. 39 agrees with the fact that Elis was the adopted country of Salmoneus, father of Tyro. Cf. Eur.

sons of Tyro. If it were possible to read the word before apioYov as IleXias, as Blass suggested, this argument would be decisive; but the editors state that the letters as are very doubtful, and that there is barely room for an 1. Weil (Journ. des Savans, 1906, p. 513) admits the force of the last argument, and sees no objection to the attribution. The projection of vv. 23, 26 and 41 to the left fr. 14 os T e7r' 'AA0eioC poais \ Oeov /xavels perhaps points to a change of speakers. £ppi\J/e SaX/iw^eus
I04>0KAE0YI

276

x

J

p

dvpwvos [ oiv aKovcrcu TO. [ ] f ?[ f eVros otKOiv r[ . ]
I][ [

J

] 8 a . . . . jLHJT6 TTTQfJiaTL

]ucroucrai' akyeiv5>v 7ra[ ]v aju, JXOVOV Xe [

[

] ^ T€ KCU KOLKOl [

/caw . [

] . ovens Tocrov[

ei Kal davelv XPV T& [ . ] . aotT[. .~\VT

[f

fr. (d) col. i [. .] p . y8[

35

[<£o]/3os TIS avrrjv Sei/Jbd T [ J . vcr' iy TaiiSe KOLvaivei, raSe [ /caX]A.i/3ouv CTT' 'AX^etov iropov

col. ii Xt'ay yap r)a . [ dXX' e/c KCLKoiv ey\_ 2 3 9«pwvos : it is perhaps significant 3 2 d KO.1, ' even supposing that,' is. that this word occurs twice in Sophocles practically equivalent to KO.1 ei; for KOX (El. 328, 0. T. 1242), but not in Aeschydoes not qualify davelv alone. See Jebb lus or Euripides. on 0. T. 305, Wyse on Isae. 5. -25. 2 6 ir6v8r)TpCas: cf. Eur. Hipp. 805 3 7 Sctpa ^vvu^ov: cf. Ei. 410 e/c Qr)(reO, irdpei/ii a&v KO.KGII> irtv0i]Tj>ia. F o r 8ei/j.uTos TOV WKr4pou, doKein i/nol. Aesch. the formation cf. frs. 98, 99 0TJX&aTpi.a., Cho. 523 &c T dveipdrwn \ Kai VVKTInaievrpia. Track. 922 eivarpiav (beside -rrXdyicTuv dufiaTiav ireTraXfifar), where tvvijTtipa.: see on fr. 1040). Aesch. Cho. the meaning of the adj. seems to be 755 ai8p6vTpia. The termination oc- determined by this passage. Eur. Hec. curred also in words of everyday speech: 69 TL •WOT' alpo/iai gvvvxos OOTW Sdnaat cf. e.g. Ar. Ran. 114, 411.—The descrip
TYPQ

277

epei.v eyo ]

rj

45

fr. (e) (TV

[ rpuvei T\

I'

] •

fr. (f)

J . . cacnv a t

. . .] . as dpcoyov narepa aVja/cra TTOVTOV

f

^

A.tcrcroju,a[t

l

[

fr. (g) [ ri

55

S[

]

Kvpt

>ea irpos . [

er.::'i 4 4 It may be assumed that Tyro is speaking to her son, and protesting that she has learnt to tolerate her ill-usage.

is TOIV ar/a.v oSvpiiaTuw or Tois...d5ijpii.a
708, frs. 54, 573.

Soph. Ant.

1251 •

Cf. Eur. J\hd. 449 Kodcpois
4 8 These scraps are the latter halves of lines, so that the probable restoration

S2 For the suggestion to read IleXios see above.

65O 0e£a

z^ocros 65O deavri vijaos cod.:corr. Soping et Dindorf 65O Hesych. II p. 303 Seavii pjjcros' i) correction to vocros; this was accepted by Dindorf (in Thesanr. IV 275 D), who 4K deou, deia. SO0OKX^S Tvpoia {i.e. Tupol a') introduced 8eCa as the necessary consepoiroB. This is a good instance of the corruption which the text of Hesychius quence. Nauck, admitting that deavq was intolerable, hesitated to adopt Oeia ; has suffered ; for it so happens that the but it can hardly be doubted that -vq was original can be restored almost with certainty. The first step was taken by due to dittography, after vdcros had become P7j
278

IO*OKAEOYI

Schmidt's Beta avrj vbaos. It should be mentioned that the lemma comes between Wo/«a and 0eavwarat, so that the corruption was antecedent to the present alphabetical order. Beta in the gloss is probably derived from a correction of the corrupt lemma, just as poirov represents letters suprascript to Tupoi: the name of the play was restored by Musurus. The use of deios = ' heaven-sent' is more frequent in Soph, than in the other tragedians, and Beta vbaos occurs in Ai. 186, Ant. 421 (ybaovs ras Ber/Xdrovs in fr. 680 is a synonym : Eur, fr. 292 vbaoi hk BfijTtav...at 5' £K BeCiv irdpeteiv). Cf. Ai. 612 Beta jiavlq. JiVavXos, Phil. 192 Beta yap ... Kal ra vaB^/iara Keiva irpos avrbv...eirtpTj, ib. 1326 e/c Betas TIL/X^JS, fr. 196, O.C. 1585 (so Hdt. 1. 126, 5. 92: the essential contradiction involved in this phrase has been pointed out by Wilamowitz on Eur. Her. 1228 ra. Bew>

ye TTTiifMTa), Phil. 1039 Ktvrpov Beiov. The last-quoted passage recalls Aesch. Prom. 709 Beta fiAtrnyi, with which H. compared Eumelus fr. 10 (EGF p. 192) BerjXdr^ Se ^avvb/ievos fidtrnyi. TOV Bebv f
651 cod.

651

651

Hesych. II p. 247 HxBifia'

a person, like /xiari/xa (El. 289, Aesch. ixiaiiixara. 2IOK\TJS 'Hvpdvvots (TVpo? Etim. 73, Theb. 169) and aTiyq/ia (Eur. Pierson, Ivpoi a Nauck). Alberti wished Or. 480). For the neuter verbal so to restore 4x^V/xaT"; but Kuester was proapplied see Tucker on Cho. 15. Another bably right in preferring I x ^ W ' idarma, similar formation is GTipy-qiia Track. in view of the occurrence of this gloss in 1138. T\aBy\ii.a.' rty fiSovJiv Eupolis fr. Phot. lex. p. 45, 21 and Suid. s.v. 131 (1 292 K.) is altogether anomalous. It is probable that ?x6r||ia was used of

652 fecunditatem iiXjje profert, id est, herbas stirpesquefrugibus nocentes': Wyttenbach on Plut. de and. poet. p. 15 F, who (corrected by Nauck to Tvpol a : Dindorf illustrates the metaphorical use of the suggests Tvpol 0 ' i.e. devrepg., or / f ) word in late^Greek. Hippocrates ap. For els Kbpov Blaydes proposed ^ Kapwtji, Stob. flor. 74. 40 is worth quoting : dXX' but the meaning of the text seems satisfactory ; for KapTTOfiavrjs should signify 0t5crei Kal TO a.KbXaa'Tov ev eavTij, oirep el ' luxuriant, with a superfluity of pro- fir] KaB 7}fi4pr}v eiriKbirTotTO, cos TOD d^vSpea duce.' Analogous are v\o/j.avris, v\o/j.a- KaBvKoixavei. Similar is the use of 0u\Xoveiv : Theophr. caus. pi. 3. 1. 5 6 Se /xaveiv : see Jebb on Ai. 143 f. TOV iTnro/xavi) Btpixos aKapiros yiveTai naBdirep {ikofLav&v \eifi.Qi/a (p. 219). The last explanation Kal 4^v^pi^uv, Clem. Alex. Paed. p. 138 given by the schol. on Ai. 143 illustrates KadvKofiavet yap /IT] KKaSevofiivri r\ &ii.ire\os. this gloss ; 1) Tbv dyav fie/jLTjvbTa (sc. Xei' Proprie dicitur de terra ac segete, in fiwvaj Kal avBouvTQ, Kal e'w&pifovTa. I£l-v3ptprimis de vite, quae per luxuriam et frovTa Toup) Trj x^V ^L^ TTXTJBOS. 652

Hesych. 11 p. 415 Kapiro/iav^s'

els els xdpov iivppi£ov
TYPQ

279

653 fj.7] cnrelpe 7roXXo?s TOV irapovTa haifx.ovacrtyw/xevo? y a p ecrrt OprjvelcrOau 653.

1 iri) o-irelp' es dXXovs F. W. Schmidt

2 wpiiroiv B: •wpiitov SMA

6 5 3 Stob.y?or. 109. 2 (iv p. 993, 10 ' it is fitting that it should be mourned in Hense) Zo0o/c\&>ire TupoOs /3' (so MA: silence.' See Sidgwick's excellent article TupoOs om. S). ' firi
objecting to the dative, which is as much in place to express the interest of the hearers as els c. ace. elsewhere to define the area of extension.—Observe how completely SaC|x
OTTI SiSoUv, Aeschylus the Alexandrian (fr. 1, Nauck, p. 824) TLS 8' IUT' dvdyKi] 8vo~TVXetv ev 7rXetot7ty, I ethv cnwirav Kav UKorif KpiimLV Tade; and a tragic frag-

ment (Nauck, p. 936) which appears to of T6XV' a n d cf. Eur. Ale. 561 TTQS odv be an expression of the same idea : Stob. i-KpvTrTes TOV Trapovra. Saifxova, Andr. 973 eel. 1. 3. 43 p. 60, 7 W. oaTLs \iyei KaKav ^u&s \eywv ri^xas | /cat rhv irapbvra daifioy'. (f>povi>v cnyri VTevei. The subject of that See also Jebb on Phil. 1100. It seems chapter is the certain retribution of God's likely therefore that the editors make Justice, and the anthologist must sometoo much of Rl. 1306 00 yap &v /caAws | how or other have been deceived by a VTrTjperoiTjP Tip irapbvri da.ifj.ovi, which false reading, when he included a line simply expresses ' to use my present which is entirely irrelevant to his purfortune.' This use of dai/jotiv is said to pose. The true sense was restored by be characteristic of the drama and especiF. W. Schmidt: mms 7' fyei KO.K\ efi ally of Sophocles; for, although not un4>povQv at-yvj VTeyei : and UT^yet. may be known in lyric, it is very rare (Find. right; but we see from this fragment of Islhm. 7. 42 dvq.cTKOfj.ev yap 6fj.ws a7racres' j Sophocles that it is not necessary. I daifj,u)v 5' ai'cros). But the notion that the would rather read, OVTIS 8' ?%ei KO.K\ ev sense of' apportioner'' God' is secondary, (ppovCjv aiyrj GTevei,—" Bill he that stiffers, | and that daifiaiv originally signined_/"?r/z/;7g If he be wise, laments in secrecy." ' Then is altogether perverse (Gruppe, p. 9914). he renders the present lines : See further Usener, Gotternamen, p. 293 ; ' Spread not before the world your present Eur. Pkoen. 1653 n. case; 'Twere best to be lamented silently.' 2 irpe'irwv is personalized as usual—

I04>0KAE0YI

28O

654 opvi<5

e^ehpov

OVTOS

Schol. Ar. Av. 275 (VT) AC On the other hand, he ejects Spuis.' (J.) Nauck's view is not convincing, and I prefer to suppose that apxv belonged to the introductory words, and that the ( 0 px ) us el eTire XP0^"- t&Spov di 7rapi;\\o- quotation was taken from the opening yfih-qv. 2O0OKXT)S 'ote H-eSpos dXX' ?K- scene of the play. To make this clearer Blaydes suggests the addition of ijs T\ To7ros d»ijp' (Phil. 211). The note has been quoted in full, because the com- before i-pxi- It should be added that in a mutilated passage of the so-called mentators are not agreed as to the point Philetaerus of Herodian (Moeris ed. of the parody. It is clear that a double Pierson, p. 435) l£e5pos...K£tZ vM fora meaning of£JeSpos is involved, and I think TTUS wv eis TI/MS £!-e$pov x&pai'- • .f" Sartfpois that for Aristophanes the schol. is right in the last words were emended by Pierson interpreting irapTJKKayiJ,4vr)v, i.e. strange, to £%. x^Pav £xav' 2O0OKX?/S iv Tupoi/3'. abnormal (Holden on Plut. Them. 24, 2). For this sense of ggedpos cf. Arist. rhet. L. Cohn in Rh. Mus. XLIII 413 published 3. 3. I4o6a 35 oftfrws ^edpov TT/V TT}S the same passage from Cod. Vat. 2226: taTW ris av lioxSrjpla! vwepfiok-fiv. Ar. means: ' Here's ?f eSpos 6 fuaoirdvripos" avKCLI fii] eh ^,uos g%e5pot> x^P ^XavZo^o/cX^s another odd-looking customer !' Rogers, (raripois, a n d emended it t o l^eSpos opvis' rendering ' with a foreign aspect,' explains 6 iroi>7]pbs Kai fj.ij atcnos wv eh i][ias' in his note that the proper meaning is 1 e"£edpov x&Pav ^Xwv' So0o/cX^s /9ct (Sevrepa) ' belonging to a foreign land.' Now TvpoT. Bergk's view that this was a difSuidas, who, as is well known, borrows ferent passage from that quoted by the from the Aristophanic scholia, has the gloss in this form : l^eSpos • IfeeSpcw xpoav scholiast on Aristophanes is untenable. Fx«c Tovrtan irapTJ)CKayp.ivqv. I believe The meaning of Sophocles was: 'What that Ar. actually wrote XPoat/ a n d that it is this bird in an ill-omened quarter?' has been corrupted in our texts to x^Pav '• See Hesych. 11 p. 117 ll-edpov T6V OVK av w a the knowledge that ?£edpov X"P s in ttXaiov oloivbv, OVK efifferov 6pvtv, OVK iv fact parodied of course assisted the cor- SeovTt TT]V e"dpav e'xovra, Phryn. praep. ruption. [Blaydes also favoured this soph. p . 7 1 , 17 d e B . l^eSpov TO dirato-wv view, and Hall and Geldart, I find, have Kal e"i;G) TT}S vevofj.i(r/j.£vT]S e"dpas. F o r t h e printed xp^ac] This makes everything technical sense of fdpa in augury cf. Eur. plain sailing, except the obscurity of Her. 596 6pviv S' Iddv TIC' OVK iv aiffiois &PXV- 'Welcker (p. 316) and others (as eSpais, where Wilamowitzhas an excellent Dindorf) suppose that Apxtf was not part note. Add Ael. nat. an. 3. 9 oi' re 'ihpai of the verse, but belonged to the words dpvLBwv Kal TTT'Tjaecs irapatpuKdrTOvres, a n d introducing it: e/c TT)S S. Sevrtpas Tvpous other passages quoted by Blomfield on &PXV (" opening passage "). Nauck thinks Aesch. Prom, 501.—For opvis J. refers that dpxv is corrupted, perhaps from &6pei, to his n. on Ant. 1021. and represents the first word of the verse. 654

(repos SrjTa x°5ros il-eSpov x&Pav %XU") in rrjs ?ZoOK\4ovs Sevripas TupoCs

655 655 Phot. lex. p . 17, 7 eppr\vo$o<SKQV 6 Trpof}a.Tol3o{TK6s, it> Tupoi /3' 2o0<wcX6>i/staws airb rod dprjv. Etym. M. p . 377, 22 ippilvofio&Kbs' 6 irpofia/rofioGKbs, iv Tu/>ot j8' J,o(poK\ijs. Hesych. I p . 278 dprjvo/3o(7/v'6s"

fi'

Trpo[3a.Tof3otTK6s.

(rvpolKW cod.).

2o0o/fX^s

Tupo?

yp&cpeTai Se ipptjvo-

/3O
ibid.

p.

276

apevofiocrKds' Trpoj3arof}o
Eustath. / / . p. 799, 37 dprjvofioo-Kbs 6 irpofiaTofSoffKos Kara Tlavo-dvtav (fr. 69 Schwabe), iK fiipovs SrfKad'/i (i.e. dpr/v stands to irpd^arov as fiipos to 6\ov ' cf. dirb fxipovs). iv de avwvifxip prfropiKi^ Xe^iKip Kal ipevofioaKos 6 avros tplperai Sid TOO e.

TYPQ

281

The existence of the nom. dp-qv corresponding to the gen. apvbs is now securely established by the evidence of an Attic inscription belonging to the first half of the fifth cent. B.C.: see Meisterhans3, p. 142 ; Brugmann, Comp. Gr. 11 p. 349 E. tr. We need not therefore discredit the existence of a genitive apyvos as well as dpvds, which is attested by Elytn. M. p. 140, 54 : ap-qv, TO firmj-

dicates that the grammarians found ipprjKOJ3OO-K6S in the text of Sophocles, and interpreted it by means of the form dprqv with which they were acquainted. No other evidence in support of a form *^pprjv (or *^ptjv) is quoted ; but it may have been drawn from the Ionic dialect (Smyth, § 134). Philologers must determine whether the double p is correct and the phonetic relation to dpr/v and Tro\tippt)v. duov eis e^xv" irpofiaTOv • Kal Kkivtrai A similar vowel variation occurs in ^pptjdpr/v, apTjvos' ^£ ov TO dpvbs Kara o~\syKOTrr}v. <j>opeiv: dppy(popciv (Meisterhans3, p. 15). KOX &Troj3o\7J rod a p'qv olov TroXtipprjves The derivation of that word is quite uniro\vj3ovTai (Horn. I 154). That it should certain : for a possible explanation see be transferred to the o- declension in Giles in C. /?. in 22-2. It is evident composition is in accordance with analogy: that no countenance should he given to see on fr. 643. Consequently there would Wagner's dpvofloo-Kbs or Bergk's py\vobe no difficulty in accounting for dprjvopocricds. Nauck rightly withdrew his /3o
656 656

Schol. Aesch. Prom. 130 (/J.r}5ev doubt, therefore, that the scholiast in-

€TTeSrjfJ.T](T€

yap

TTj

'ATTLKT]

metres of the tragedians.

Crusius in

Mpiriov ipG>v Kal Tjpeadrf {r)pd(Td7] m) \iav Pauly-Wissowa 1 2042 thinks that he is TOLS fj.£\€<Ti TOU Tpayittov (the text is clearly right in assigning to this source the in-

troduction of ionics into the oldest tragedies, and refers to Phryn. frs. 6 and 14. The quotation from Anacreon VT0 £XP& ^ attTOLS OVK tv iravri Toirq, &AA illustrates the appearance of the colon preceding the ionic dimeter: ev rots 8pT]VT}TiKois, ws Kal ~o(poK\rjs TvpoT in Aeschylus it is followed by two i n P' (so M : Ti)poi om. /S' RV). &m Si Taura. 61101a ™ 'ovd' ad [/.' idaets jxedtiovT' K\d>ixeva. In spite of the evidence of the scholia, Schroeder refuses to recognize o'iKad' direXSciy' (Anacr. fr. 56). the presence of ionics in Aesch. Prom. The information is useful and important. I.e.: see his analysis {Aesch. Cant. p. 38 f.). Anacreon was a guest at the court of For similar ionics in Sophocles with dvaHipparchus c. 520 B.C., and his friendKk&ixtva, introduced by an iambic dimeter, ship with Critias is acknowledged by see Phil. 1174—1181. Plat. Charm. J;T E. There can be no mutilated : the sense required is given by ^*° ; i ' c fee& ..i\cyr,H aavrov except Weil' v 66 rpayiKos, payos, e p that the sequel points to the plural).

657 [Tupw w

TO,

ets r\v

al He\lav. For the aKd-q vulgo, iv o-Kd<pri Nauck). oiSiv suggests that they are to be found in iciiev, el pi) o-vvovaid^eiv Kal TIKTCIV. 6 yap fr. 945, 2 (n.). UoaeiSdv i)dyn Ty Tvpoi Kal iytvvr\o-e 657

Schol. Ar. Lys. 138 sq.

(OVK

^TOS d
IO*OKAEOYI

282

658 Se fid-^i/xos icmv <ws ^pf
OLVTT)

658. 2 tnSripip cod. A c et schol.: ] schol. Arist. 658

Arist. rhet. 2. 22. 14001317 &\\os

Aristotelis codd. plerique | tjjipovaa that (j.dx<
(sc. TOTTOS) airb TOU bvbftttTOS, olov ws 6 2oo- sary, and that the integrity of the text is supported by the evidence of Eustathius, K\T}S '
The reference is to Sidero, the step- Jebbpoints out, it was popularly connected with alerds. For the word-play on the mother and oppressor of Tyro: see Inproper name see on fr. 965, Lobeck on troductory Note. There has naturally Ai. 430, and Cope on Arist. rhet. I.e. been a tendency to connect her name F. W. Schmidt seeks to improve the with her cruelty: Horn. X 491 ^ yhp aol ye aiS'/jpeos iv tppeel Bvfibs, Starkie on Ar. passage by writing cis Kal x/>w/^'"; | &opoCo-a has superior authority, and in is ingenious, and at first sight plausible, although (ppoveiv Toiivofia would require 0. C. 60 Nauck substituted (popovtri for justification. But Cobet does not notice

659 KOfx,rj<; Se Trivdos Xay^dvct) TTMXOV h r)Th<; crvvapnacrBelcra fiovKoXwv VTTO 659.

2 ^vvapiraaBeitra malit Nauck

659

Aelian nat. an. n . r8 6-rfhei.a.v ravTa 4<JTIV • ' Kbix-qs...bfS-qv.' I have di 'iirirov is aQpodivta \\JTTT)tja.oav iravv bracketed the words T<J Spa/iaTL: so o Kal OVK aTanTtl, Kal Tratierai TT)S ii/3pews Kal rod OK\T}S alvtTTeTcu iv TTJ Tvpoi [TU Spd/xarc]. jreirolyjTai di oi alirrj \4yovaa, Kal a X^yei

ibid. 2. 10 /xdXuTTa Be KO/j.wtxa 'liriros d/3p5rar6f T4 eaTi Kal dpvirTiK&TaTov. dn/iafei 70OK avaftrji'ai TOVS OVOVS avT-qv, livwip Se ya/xov/xhT) rfSerat, Kal faurrjv atit.o'i TQV f/.€yl(7Tujv. oirep oftv o~vvet56T€S oi (3ov\6/i.evoi i)/u6vovs aty.ai yev4a6ai, dwoOpio-avres TTJS 'iinrov TT]V X^V ^Ky

TYPQ p iv i7T7reiatcrtv aypia uepos depLcrdrj i;av96v avyiva>v airo, airaa-delcra 8' es Xeijawva TTOTajxioiv TTOTWV

283

5

3 fiavdpaurai codd.: corr. Brunck 5 airacQeicsa. codd. : aTa8eiva : iv Xei/i&vi codd scnpsi XCI^CKI codd. Cf. Callim. h. Del. 298 Qipoi TO -irpwrov loiXuv.—For the subj. without &v in a relative clause of general assumption see Goodw. § 540, O. C. 39s (J.'s n.), frs. 680, amat. 9 p. 754 A 6 dc avoriWwv TTJK 7112, 682, 3, 808, 837, 84r, 929. VOLKO....6^.OL6S ion rots diroKeipoviTL ras 5 f. are corrupt as given in the MSS, tinrovs eha wpbs Trorafxbv ^ \LIXVTJV and have not hitherto been satisfactorily &yov<xi' KadopCjaav yap iKavr-qv r^\v emended. The passage of Plutarch (see eiKbva TTJS oi/'ews dxaXX^ Kal &/j.op- above) determines one condition to which tpov, dtptevat TO. (ftpvdyfiara Xiyerat Kal any reconstruction of v. 5 must conform, namely, that the filly's presence on the Xen. de re eq. 5. 8 ai ydp dyeXalai. TUV bank of the stream is part of the herds'iinrbiv OUV O^ttOtWS VTTOfjLtVOVfft ToitS OVOVS men's purpose. o-irao-Belo-a is suitable in ewi rrj ox^t-a ^ws av KOfiwaiv ov eveKa Kal itself (Xen. eq. 7. 1), but cannot stand aTOKeipoufft TT/)6S rr\v ox^tav rat Xirirovswith iv Aei/icSi'i. I propose to substitute awavres ol dvofHarovvTes. Columella 6. 35 Is X£ip.wva: iv and ds are sometimes rara qitidem sed et haec est equartim nota confused (Bast in Schaefer's Greg. Cor. pp. 429, J26) and \ec/j.u>vi would be a rabies, ttt cum in aqua iviaginem suam necessary consequence of the misreading, viderint, amore inani capiantur, et per ejri \ei/j.wva would also be possible (Bast, hunc obliiae pabuli, tabe cupidinis interp. 742; Cobet, V.L. p. 281 f.), but is eant. eius vesaniae signa sunt cum per condemned by the rhythm. Of the conpascua veluti extinntlatae concursant, jectures which assume that the fault lies subinde ut circumspicientes requirere ac with (nraoBeXtra the best is Hartung's desiderare aliqtiid videantur. mentis (TTadetaa, suggested independently by error discittitur si deducas ad aquam. Powell [C.R. xix 230) and Paley (A.J.P. tune demum speculatae deformitatem in 128). H. mooted the possibility of stiam, prisiinae imaginis abolent me(nraade'iaa being used for viraaanivi) (see moriam. on fr. 837), 'quaffing the water.' He The passage from Plutarch shows that quotes Phaedr. 12 ad fontem cervus, cinn the two extracts from Aelian do not refer bibisset, restitit, \ et in liquore vidit effigiem to two separate occasions on which a suam, but this solution does not commend mare's mane is to be cut, but that niuleitself. Weil adopted Hermann's airabreeding is always the purpose in view. ffovcra, with xiypbv for viro and Kovpds in Columella's account is unintelligible as v. 7 as the object of 25TJ. Blaydes conit stands. jectured TroTafilii) iron}, with avyaaaa' 2 (WKOXWV is generalized of herdsiiSwp in v. 6. J. held that, if the text is men: so in Homer T 221 rod Tpiax^Xiat sound, TTQTOJV is governed by birb in v. 6; ITTTTOL eXos Kara fiovKokiovTo. See n. on but, apart from the difficulty of avyaaBetaa, Eur. Phoen. 28 lirwofiovKoXoi, and Postgate any such solution is excluded, as soon as in C.Q. 11 295, and cf. fr. 1057. we perceive that the herdsmen's intention 3 a"ypio. \(pi, according to Shorey to bring the mare to the water must be (Class. Phil. V 90) is practically equivaclearly indicated.—iroTa|iCiov TTOT<SV: the lent to dypiws. So Xi7rape? x^PL n^ El' genitive is descriptive, as we speak of a 1377, as he points out, is glossed by water-meadow : cf. o<poK\TJS 5e ZoiKe fiefj-vrjadat. rod irddovs. Plut.

SO0OKAEOYI

284

i&y cr/aas etScoXov avrauyes TVTTCO Kovpais ari/icos SiareriXjueVr/s frfi ei>,

KOLV a.VOlKTip\LWiV

TIS ol

TTTTjcrcrovcrav aia~^vvr)cri,v ola j irevOovcra KOI KkaCovcra rrjv ndpos

VLV

<])6^TQV.

6 avTavyks riwcfi scripsi: avyaaBeia' xnro codd., aiyaadetad irov Meineke, aXmaBeia' iiirb Haupt, avyaadeia' SSap Wecklein 7 dri/iois Wakefield | SiaTeriKfj.^vrii opT]v. Brunck's x^^V" (recently The part, agrees with ITKIOS and the ace. revived independently by Weil, and <J>dpn,v (see cr. n.) is idiomatic: see nn. approved by Nauck and Blaydes) is an on Eur. Phoen. 267, 1403. It would be undoubted improvement, but its probaover-subtle to suppose that SiaTETiX/iivris bility is not so great as to warrant us in depends directly on etSoAoir (si~. iavT-rjs).restoring' it to the text. Cf. El. 52. The termination of (pbflrjv was assimilated J., with the MS text in vv. 5—7, transto the preceding word by a common error lated as follows: ' And it is mine to mourn (cf. fr. 503, 3). for my hair, like a filly, which, seized by B f. Nauck says that these lines are herdsmen, has its yellow mane shorn from ' in libris graviter corrupti,' but, as J. its neck in the stable by a rough hand; remarks, it is difficult to see why.—K&V and then, dragged forward on the plain, dvoiKT(p|i.uv TIS oiKrCpeie' viv: cf. 0. T. sees the image of its shadow where it is

TYPQ mirrored in the waters of the river, when its hair has been cruelly ravaged by the shears. Ah ! even a hard heart would

285

pity the creature, as it cowers in shame, to see how it rages in mourning and grief for the adornment that it has lost.'

660 irpotTTrjvaL [ j

rpdire^av 66O.

OL/JL^I

alra

Kal Kapyrjcrta

2
66O Athen. 475 A (illustrating the use of the word Kapxhawv) 2o0OK\i}s 5i

credited.

Tupol TrpoL..KapXTi(na.'

held that the two passages afforded each other mutual support in establishing the meaning ' to present oneself at a place' or ' before a person.' But I think that Kaibel's criticism is justified, viz. that, even if irpotrTTJpaL could in ritual language accommodate itself to the construction of WeTtiw, it would not follow that it could be applied to any voluntary entrance, nor is it credible that the serpents presented themselves as Uirai. In his text of Athenaeus Kaibel prints Bergk's TrpoairTfjvtu, without altogether approving it; but to think of winged serpents is an unwarrantable strain on the imagination. Schweighauser's trpoffGTrivai is less open to obvious objection, and has the support

i

On what occasion did the serpents appear ? Welcker (see Introductory Note) supposed that these lines came from a description of Tyro's prison-house ; but the words rather suggest a festal celebration, and it may be conjectured that the entertainment given by Salmoneus to Neleus and Pelias was interrupted in the manner described. The portent bears some resemblance to the appearance of the serpent in Horn. B 308 ff., hut there is a much closer parallel in the circumstances of the sacrifice in honour of Anchises as related by Verg. Aen. 5. 84 ff. See especially v. 90 ff.: ille (sc. angtiis) agmine longo j tandem inter pat eras et levia pocula serpens \ libavitque dapes, rursitsque innoxius imo \ successit tumulo, et depasta altaria liquit. There too the cups from which Aeneas had poured the libations are described as carchesia (v. 77). A similar occurrence which happened to Tib. Gracchus in Lucania during the Second Punic War was regarded as a presage of misfortune : ad exta sacrijicio perpetrato angues duo ex occulto adlapsi adedere iocur conspectique repente ex oculis abierunt (Liv. 25. 16: cf. Val. Max. 1. 6. 8). Add Ov. Fast. 2. 711 ecce, tie/as visu, mediis altaribus anguis \ exit, et exstinctis ignibus exta rapit (Liv. 1. 56). 1 irpoo-rfjvai ought to mean ' approached,' as is indicated by Athenaeus' paraphrase, but that the verb could bear this meaning and be followed by an ace. of the place visited is not generally

]I p

Jebb on El. 1378 17 ae TroKka

x

of Aesch. Pers.

p

p)

xP

206 fSw/ibv •wf>otskaTt\v.

Nevertheless the notion of the serpents ' taking up their position before the table' is unsuitable, and contrasts unfavourably with Vergil's lapsusque per aras (v. 86) and Livy's ad exta adlapsi. Surely the simplest remedy is irpoafirivtu, a suggestion which has been anticipated by Hartung and Wagner. It would bear the appropriate meaning 'mounted the table,' for which see Headlam in J. P. xxx 309 f. 2 Kap\ii
200KAE0YZ

286

661 iv KCLKoicri Ov/Aos €vvr]0el<; opa. 6 6 1 Stob.y?OT-. 20. 29 ( m p. 544, 14 1000 iirel %6AOJ/ eOvaffe M/vws, Opp. Cyn. 1. 626 dXX' ovd' ws &ai8iav %6\ov efivaae, Hense) 2O0OKX?JS ^P Tvpoi (iv rip S, & Nonn. Dion. 13. 276 oij/ifios ebvqaas Ttipifj [vel -/>«] MA). ' ir6XK'...bpg..' irpbrepov x°^0J/ a/"r ras b'\peis otiic if j3\iTreu> KaKois ov ip)upopov, fr. 589. 3, Eur. fr. rb Kel/xevov iv rots iroffiv, OVTWS 6 dv^Jbt [078 dv8pui> T&5' effrlv ivSUuiv re Kal iiraipb/ievos Ttji \oyi)ievov i( aiirov droirov oiiK 8eoh- With €WT]0as cf. Apoll. Rhod. 3. &
662 fxey 662 662

CITT^S,

irpiv TeXevTyjcravr' ZSrj<S-

ixiyav Stobaei codd. SMA et Cic. nonnulli

Stob. flor. 105. 21 (iv p. 934, 4

which is strongly recommended by Tyrrell on Cic. I.e., is much the more ISr/s.' The line is quoted without the attractive: ' don't cry till you're out of name of author or play in Miller, MU. the wood.' It is also the more likely de litt. gr. p. 381 |Ui)7ru...fSj;s. iirl TUIV for two reasons : (1) ,u<:ya eiwe'iv is more 0av/xa^6vToiv TOVS TO. /ieyd\a viriaxvovfxi- suitable as applied to the speaker's own vows' oi yap i<m irplv airoBavbvra Id-ys, actions than to those of another ; see At. dWa irplv ei's rChoi ayaybvr' ISr/s, /it?) 386 iitidev niy' efrrjs and the instances 6avpid
'/X^TTW...

287

TYPQ made in Gregor. Naz. 11 p. 6 B /J.rj8h

Hence the corruption in the MSS of Stobaeus and Cicero (see cr. n.). EUendt was influenced by the same consideration, irci(T|UaTos. Plutarch [reg. et imp. apoph. but evidently found it difficult to make p. 184 B) relates how, when Eumenes was up his mind. The grammarian whose reported dead and his brother Attalus explanation is given in Miller's codex had married his wife, Eumenes, returning clearly knew the passage only as a quotato Pergamus, saluted his brother in the tion : he rightly refused to take reXevTT)usual manner and whispered in his ear: aavra as airodavovTa, but, seeing the jUTJ O"7re05e yij[/.ai irplv reKevTTj&avT' tdrjs. difficulty of combining firjirw fxiy1 ei'7rgs Here the point of the parody lies in the with his interpretation of Tekevriiaai/Ta special application of TeXtvTrjtravT' idrjs, as et's ri\os ayaybvra, he was reduced to and the fact that the participle can be the desperate expedient of supposing that treated as masc. sing, does not exclude ' don't boast' was equivalent to ' don't the possibility that it was neut. plur. in admire the boaster.' F. W. Schmidt the original. When the line stood by escaped from this dilemma by reading itself, it was natural that it should be •irplv TekevT^cras Tiixt)s, but it does not connected with the famous precept of seem likely that the text is corrupt.— Solon (cf. fr. 646 n.), and that TeXevrr)- For irpiv followed by the subj. without ffavr' should be interpreted accordingly. av see on fr. 646, 2.

pey' eforjjs ffwropius HvOponros we, and p. 157 D firiSip /j.£y' efrrijs evTrXouv vpb

663 T'IKTOVCFL

yap

TOL

/ecu. vocrovs

6 6 3 Stob. flor. 99. 19 (iv p. 860, a single emotion as the state of mind inr Hense) Zo^o/cXeous Tvpovs (so MA, duced by frequent disappointment: see TupoOs Om. S). ' TLKTOVtTl...5v(rduy.iaL.' Cf. El. 218, Eur. fr. 822, Theophr. fr. 120 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 89, 19 5Vo/c\?)s Tvpot. T
cf.

avdptcTrotat

Eur.

fr.

oivos Kal T7]v rod yf)pws dva6vfj.Lai>, the the saying 1071 AOTTCU

TIKTOVGLV voffovs,

was yap

Philemon

depression of old age. In the Stoic system hvadvixia is an etSos of \vin] (en"' aKOrqi ri §v<jKiv7]TLp), and consequently

belongs to the iraBt) (Sto. vet.fr. Ill 414, 420 Arn.). Here the plural emphasizes yap yiyvtrai \ iroKKoiai, KOX voa-qixar' OVK ld
5ta \VTTT}V KOX fxavla

664 yrjpoi.<; SiSotcrKei vavra

Kal ^povov

Xpbvos 5idayp.a irotKiXdjTarov, Antiphon 14 Hense) 'Zocpoiikiovs Tvpovs (so MA, 6. 2 6 xpbv°s y&P KaL V c[Lireipia ra fJ.7] KaXbK 'ixovTa dtd&VKei. rod! AvSpiJnrovs.— Tvpovs om. S). ' yi)pas...Tpil3ri.' 664

Stob. flor. i r j . 8 (iv p . 1021,

H. renders: 'Age teaches all, and time's experience/ The sentiment is akin to the well-known saw j3ov\al yepbvTiav, for which see on fr. 260. Cf. Aesch. Prom.

1013 dXV inSiSdcxKeL •Ki.vff

Xpdvoi) Tpi.pi] is not merely the lapse of time regarded objectively, although this would be sufficient to explain Ant. 1078, if it stood alone, but the effect upon us of its passage. This conies out clearly in Plat. rep. 493 B KaTap.aduv re ravra

IOOKAEOYI

288

Aeschylus' powerful phrase x Tpipij. fiiov might be paraphrased prosaically as 'experience of misfortune': the man of mere fortune cannot stand against the wearing influence of reverse when its turn comes. This is, I suppose, what Kennedy meant by his 'luck-reversing brunt of life,' and is not far removed q / fiiov, \ elr' oUp fpf from Headlam's view, although the latter TTJV Hpof/,T]8^bts irdpa | e^r' ofiv apdyKtjp etre presses still further the meaning of Tpifi-rj. T V rrj fiatcpy rpifirj | avT7)v irapao~x&p V A. Gennadius proposed xPeia f° r 7VPa*, (piau/ SidciffKaKov, where 'long experience' quoting Archytas ap. Plut. fr. XXII. 6 is the obvious meaning. It might seem Xpeio) TnW i8l8a%e, and Nauck (p. xxiv) hardly worth while to call attention to inclined to 7roXXd(for v&vra), after Solon this point, had not a failure to observe fr. 18 etc.; but the text does not seem to it given unnecessary difficulty to some of require amendment. the commentators on Aesch.^4^. 471 (see for instance Wecklein's note). In fact, ir&VTa ^vpovcria re Kal "%pbvov Tpi&yi, a n d

is implied in the use of 77JIJ877 for delay, as well as in the meaning of Siarpi^. There is a good example in Moschion fr. 6, 18 (p. 814 Nauck), which is particularly relevant here: iirel 8' 0 TLKTCOV & \\

66 5 aKcov S' afiaprcov

OVTLS

avdpconajp

6 6 6 Stob._/?
est nocens quicumque

dlKaiov eis 6pyy]v iretreiv, T h u c . 3. 40 £1/7yv
roiis dvBpwTrovs Kal dSucovvTes Kal \pevS6/tiecoi Kal i^airaravTes Kal afiMprdvovTes €K6VT€S, dXXd fj.i) &KOVTes, PeXrlovs clvai (se. ipalvopTai] rj ol aKovres.

non sponte est nocens.

Such moral judgements may seem trivial to us, but were fresh and vital in a comM). ' OLKWV...tcaicds.' munity where accidental homicide might The thought was a common-place : be visited with a year's exile. All the Track. 727 dXX' d ^ 0 l rois (npdXeun py '£ more startling was Socrates' pronounceeKovaias | opyf] 7reTT€ipa, 0. C. 977 7rws ay ment in the face of common opinion that T6 *y' aKov irpayfi' av eUdrujs i/^yois ; Phil. 1318 Sffoi. 5' eKovffioLGiv £yKeivTai ^Xd^acs | oiSeis extiv irovripds; and this he was prepared to defend by the still more remark...TO-UTOIS oOre yap able paradox that a voluntary wrong is better than an involuntary. See Plat. toXeads viv' avSpdnroiai 8e Oe&v SISOVTUV elxbs 4%afiapT&veu>, T r . fr. adesp. 80 etirep Hipp. min. 371 E—372 D, where Socrates yap ovSt rots KCLKWS dedpaKdviv \ aKovaiws formulates his position : ol ^XdiHTOvres

666

666

o-\.TOiai P o r s o n : of roicn A

6 6 6 Athen. 99 F (in the course of a discussion on the use of x°PT&£el-v) 2o0oKX?)S r e eV T?vpo?

'(TITOKTI...t^evifofj.ev.'

This line is supposed to refer to the entertainment offered by Salmoneus to Pelias and Neleus on their arrival. ira7x°P T o l < r i v : it does not seem possible to determine whether this word is merely the equivalent of 7racroios, or whether it retains any of the contemptuous

significance which clearly attached to Xipros and %opTdfw as applied to human food. For xbpT0* cf. Hippon. fr. 20
Xiov x^PToVy

an(

i for the verb Plat. rep.

586 Afio<SKi)ndTivi>SIKIJV Karca del pXtirovTes Kal K€KV<pores ds yijp Kal els Tpawifa's fKuTKOPTai xopTo-tbuev01T h e speaker in

Athenaeus, who is asked why he substituted x°PTao~8rivai for /copeo-fl^i/oi, adduces

TYPQ

289

a number of instances from comic poets with food. Cf. Epict. diss. 1.9. p 9 19 9 irav of the application of the verb to men. . . . pv, KaOijirde K\&OVT6$ irepl The limitation is significant; and, so far TTJS aiipiov irbdev 'to be filled'

667 XOP.

TTOWCJV 8' iv TToXvTrXTjOCa

OVT air' €vyev4(nv iaOXbs OVT fro 667.

\iav

^p

KOXOS* fipoTusv Se TTMTTOV ovSev.

1 Chori notam apponit S | 7ro\XuJj' suspectum

3 TO Xiav codd.: 6

Xia* Grotius, Trd\u> Meineke, dei Wecklein, Tov/iiraKiv J. [ ppoTwv J . (fipoTC>i>...oi5eyl

Blaydes): f}poT
KaKuv. There is a note of pessimism, such as often characterizes him, in the version of Sophocles. Cf.. also Ant. 37 Sel&is T&xa \ (IT' eiyevTjs wtyvKas dr'

Thuc. 2. 40 Pericles, representing the democracy, neatly turned the tables on the leisured classes, who accepted the word dd as a compliment, by retorting: TwvBe( (sc. ™ 7roXm«3p) ) f fiere-

\ iroXXuv is generally suspected. Thus Herwerden proposed ot; iroXti with £
Xovra OUK dirpdyfj.ova dXX' dxp&ov vofii^o-

liev. See Neil's excellent discussion of political nomenclature in his edition of the Equites, pp. 202—209, where however, in dealing with dxp«os at p. 208, he does not mention its application to the masses.—TO X£av is undoubtedly corrupt. Jacobs conjectured O8T' dxpeiuv awo \tav, but \lav is unsatisfactory in any case: other suggestions are mentioned in the cr. n. J. writes: ' I would read TravGijpTtp Tafifj.rjvcjj jroXXuw' | deiv&v arvy- TOv|MraXiv, " contrariwise." The similar v(cv r' alwvi.3 But the fact that TTOWQV is rhythms in the latter parts of vv. 2 and 3 here unqualified makes it difficult to beindicate that these two verses were in the lieve in its genuineness.—iroXinrXT)8£a, same measure. Toiip.Tra.\u> restores this multitude, does not occur elsewhere in metrical agreement.' The metrical contragedy; but we have ira/iirXr/ft'a (which ditions are very uncertain: see below.— Blomfield wished to introduce here) in PpoTtov. J.'s conjecture was accepted by fr. 373, and av5poir\-/l0ei.a. in Aesch. Pers. H. The former quotes 0. T. 1195 flpoTwi> 238. Dindorf (in Thes. s.v.) remarked oiSh fiaKaplfa, and his view is simpler that TrohvirXnBelq, might stand here, so far and better than Herwerden's proposal to as metre is concerned. read (nropif. The metre is doubtful. As the text 2 f. dxpe£wv. as corresponding to evP. II.

19

290

ZOcfOKAEOYS

stands, vv. 1, 2 appear to be Aeolic polyschematist trimeters,akin to the Asclepiad, and the first acephalous. The nearest parallel I can find is in Pind. Isthm. 8. 5. See J. W. White in C. Q. i n 296. The third line, if irdXiv (e.g.) is accepted,

would be an iambic trimeter catalectic. The scheme is then :

668 ALOVVCTOV TOV

Tavpotftdyov

6 6 8 Schol. Ar. Ran. 357 (fa\hk Kpa- f)ov
669 r/veyKov 6 6 9 Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 98, 11 yveyKov £7rt Trpt&rou irpoawirov. 2O0OKA^S Tvpot,'ApurTo<pa.vr)S 6eff/io0opiais (742). In Ar. Thesm. 742 rjveyKov is immediately followed by TJveyKas ai; and Cobet (N.L. p. 2 f.) concluded that ijveyica and elira are equally illegitimate in Attic, and that &eyKov and ivtyKas are the products of a late age. On the other hand, Rutherford's modified statement (New Phryn. p. 220), derived from Veitch, that 'in the indicative and imperative the forms in alpha were used in Attic, except when the requirements of metre or a wish to avoid hiatus suggested ijveyKov and iveyKov' {itveyKe), requires correction in view of

the facts recorded by Meisterhans3, p. 183. The latter shows that fyeyKov is the older form, and quotes iveyK^TOi from inscriptions of the fifth century and airrfveytcov from shortly after 403 B.C. On the other hand, iviyKas is the only recorded form of the participle. In the first person singular riveyKov is more frequent, and, so far as our evidence goes and excluding compounds, more Attic than ijveyica (El. 13, Eur. Ion 38). The Atticist tradition (Ael. Dion. fr. 156 Schw., Phryn. praep. soph. p. 73, 1 de B.) recognized -rjveyicov and rjreyKa as equally legitimate, so that the purpose of the Antiatiicist is obscure.

TYPQ—YBPII

291

YBPII Nothing is known which will explain this title, but the personification recalls McS^o? and "Ept?. It should however be mentioned that Hybris was the mother of Pan, according to the MS reading of Apollod. 1. 22, and Tzetz. Lycophr. 772. The birth of Pan would of course be an event suitable to be recorded in a satyr-play. 670 A-qdr/v

r e TTJV

iravTcov

K(O(j>rjv oivavSov 67O. 1 TT]V TravTuiv Blaydes: TTJV wdvr' SMA, raZ TT)V irdvr' Gesner, TTJV airavr' Wagner, TTJV rtt •wa.vr' Gomperz, Ha (vel re/ceix coll. Hes. Theag. 227) TTJV TT&VT' Buecheler, r' ^xei ( ve l T ' &y€t) TVV vavr' Hense 6 7 O Stob. flor. id. 3 (ill p. 610, 4 something kept back from oneself, the Hense) 2O0OKXCOI/S "TjUpeais aaripov (so genitive follows dirotrTcpeiadai. in preferMA : aaripov om. S, aaTvpwv Meineke. ence to the accusative. Eur. Her. 137 But Hense defends the singular by quoting 'EXXas w tyiip.b.'xavs [ otous otovs 6\£
67I icrOieiv ideXcov TOV 6 7 1 Athen. 657 A S4\<pa.Ka Be aptre-that (Bfkwv icrSieiv should be read.—In VLKQS etpijKe...So0o/cX^s "T/3pet 'eGdUw... an earlier book (p. 375 A) Athenaeus had argued that, as connected with 8^\
19—2

292

S04>0KAE0YZ

YAPOOPOI

Welcker inferred (p. 286) from the corresponding title of Aeschylus le/j,i\r) fj 'TSpocpopoi (TGF p. 73) that the subject was the birth of Dionysus as related in Hygin. fab. 179 and elsewhere. The conclusion is very doubtful, although some might see a slight confirmation in fr. 674. E. A. I. Ahrens held that the vSpo<j>6poi in Aeschylus were the women who attend the mother in child-birth, and bathe the new-born child. See also E. Maass, de Aesch. Suppl. (1890), p. 10.

672 'A/fecrraiotcriv e/u,/6ey8a>s for the name of the town called Egesta by T h u c , Aegesta by Diodorus and Strabo, and Segesta by the Romans, which is situated in the north-west corner of Sicily. Vergil treats it as a Trojan settlement, Sophocles, which should have followed, named in honour of the semi-Trojan has found its way to the wrong place: ib. p. 365, 1 6xo.vov b'dev y\ d
Phot. lex. p. 366,13 o'xos 'Aicea-

credos • 4S6KOVV a! SuceXiral ij/ilovoi elvai (Twovdalai" T) yap "AKe
wrongly placed under the lemma dKetrrai <j>pives eoBXiZv.) Hesych. Ill p . 249 o'xos *AK€(TTOUOS (atc^ffTaiscod.)' e7ret al XnceXucai 71/j.lovot (rirovdaioi. rji> 8i 'AK£ °^ a s m g ' e c a r i i s a n instance of

pluralis maiestatis, probably with reference to its composite structure: cf. El. 727 Bapicalois o'xois, and see Gildersleeve, § 52, Kuehner-Gerth, § 348. 3, Anm. 2.— ' A C - i v : Acesta is an old variant

diro rSs aykaoK&pirov | SwceXias &XrHiaSatdaXoev fiareiuv, Critias fr. 2 Diels elra 8' 6'xos SiKfXos /faXXei dtnravri re KpariGTOS*

For Sicilian horses see fr. 162 and Jebb on O.C. 312.—epPfPus 7ro8a : with foot Irmly planted. Cf. Eur. Phoen. 1J2 6s dp/.ia \evKOv r)vioaTpo(j>u /3ejSiis, and see the commentators on Hipp. 1189. For the ace. see my nn. on Eur. Hel. 526, Hdid. 168, and other evidence collected by Blaydes on Ar. Eccl. 161.

673 TTokvKOLVOV 673

Schol. Soph. Ant. i TO 5e KOIVOV

o Zo0o/cX?7S (rvvex^s £TTI TOV GLO€\^)OV TIQTJ-

aiv olov KOX iv TCUS 'T67>o0opots riraxev * TTOXIJKOIVOV ApupLTplrav ' avri TOV TTOXU-

aSeXipov. Hesych. II p. 503 KOIC6S...

&8e\
[Nauck's iroXixafiov is probably a misprint]) 'AfupiTpiTTjv.'

Amphitrite is called 'many-sistered,' as

YAPOOPOI—<1>AIAKEI

293

The meaning is not established in Pindar, as might be inferred from L. and S.— The unusual force of the compound epithet led Seyffert to conjecture iro\iKOITOV. ' One may suspect that Sophocles said.-.TroXwciv/ioi'' 'A/upiTpirav, the epithet of the sea in Solon, Etnpedocles and a Talbwv Koir' &v, d Kelvip y4vot | prj 'Svarip Xqaev, yv hv tKTreVK6ra, O.C. 535 Kowai fragment in Suidas v o\v«i/uM'os Oah&acrqs: •ye 7rar/)6s ade\(f>eal, and perhaps Ant. cf. Horn. 7 91, fi 60.' Headlam in C.R. XVIII -243. Blaydes conj. iroki 202 -qBtXyae 5' a'tparos noivod 7rd
being one of the Nereids: see Apollod. 1. 11. Her sisters are the «ar6MiroSes Njjpj/5es of O.C. 718. The other passages in Sophocles which the scholiast had in mind as justifying his interpretation of Koivds by d8e\06s are : O.T. 261 KOLVUV re

674 674

Schol. Soph. Phil. 1199 ftm

to proper names. It is clear that diminutives were so formed, as they often appear beside the full name, and Blass {Gramm. neut. Gr. p. 71) has collected several examples from the language of the New Testament. Lobeck pointed out that the present notice indicates that the suffix was not entirely colloquial; and the name Menas, formally given to a Spartan in Thuc. 5. 19, shows that to Athenian usage was not necessarily similar to that of the other Greeks. But we cannot trace the associations of Ba/cxos.

IxivTOi \afieiv KO.1 ftpovras avrl rod fipovr-fj (Ba.KxevTrjv Blaydes).

Apart from its association with the names of birds (cbrcrySs etc.), the termination -as,when used to form common nouns, was a vulgarism expressive of contempt: cf. xe TpeirSs, ^aKa8Ss(Starkie on Ar. Ach. 1150). KaTaayas is attributed Aeschylus (fr. 428, Phryn. p. 433 Lobeck). Neil(onAr.^.534 Kovvas) holds that the force of the suffix was similar, as applied

*AIAKEI

According to Welcker1, this play was a sequel to the Nausicaa, containing the entrance of Odysseus into the palace of Alcinous, the narrative of his previous history, and his dismissal to continue his journey. Consequently he assigned to this play frs. 861 and 965, which Brunck, followed by1 Dindorf (frs. 407, 408), included in the fragments of the Niptra' . Welcker thought that the words Kal ftopas aprv/xara (fr. 675) were part of Odysseus' narrative, but it is at least as likely that they refer to the Phaeacians (n.). Ellendt (s.v. dpTvw), partly on the strength of fr. 1122, held that the Phaeacians was undoubtedly a satyr-play. The evidence as to the plot and general character of the play is too slight to warrant discussion; and it is not even certain that 1

p- 231 f. He added Tr. fr. adesp. 165, which he understood to refer to Circe, but, though the name of Sophocles (fr. 1062) precedes it in Eustathius, there is nothing else to show that the fragment belongs to him. 2

I04>0KAE0YZ

294

Welcker was right in finding its source in the Odyssey. For all we know, it may have comprised the adventures of the Argonauts in Phaeacia, as described by Apoll. Rhod.4.982—12.22, when the Colchians overtook them and demanded the surrender of Medea, and, after Alcinous had promised to give her up in case of her not being actually married to Jason, Arete hurried on the marriage in order to prevent this result. Again, since Pollux 9. 106 refers to "O/i^/ao? ev Q>ai,a!;i when speaking of Nausicaa playing ball, it is just possible that the ata/ce? of Sophocles was an alternative title for his Nausicaa. We might then compare fr. 675 with Horn. £ j6, 209, 246. But the existence of the recorded alternative HXvvrpiai makes this improbable.

675 /cat /3o/aas 6 7 5 Athen. 67 F on apri/xara eiiprirai Trapi 2O0OKX« 'KO.1 fiopas apri/iaTa.' The quotation is assigned to the Phaeaces on account of Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 82, 32 dprifiara

• oi% v86<rpara.

SOQOKXTJS

*a£a|i, which at any rate shows that the word apri/j-ara occurred in this play, as also in frs. 328, 709. The Phaeacians (Horn. $ 248 akl 5'

T]ntv dais re 0/X?/, Hor. Ep. I. 2. 27 fruges consumers nati) were naturally skilled in condiments. Campbell strangely misunderstands the Antiatticist, when he speaks of fiSvcfia as the later Greek equivalent of d'pTvpa. The Atticists condemned apriw and its derivatives (Moeris, p. 198,9 ^Swai'ATriKoi, a.pTV(raC"E\\rives); and Sophocles is cited to confute them.

676 676

Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 83,

21 i,irotST\jJrp>a.i' avri rov SijXucrai.

Index).

But the Atticists were wrong if

So^o- they condemned the word itself as post-

The word diro
classical. Thuc. 4. 27 and Plat. Euthyd. 276 B would be enough to prove the contrary, even if the present evidence were wanting.

AIAPA

Welcker held that the plot of the Phaedra, which in its principal features seems to have resembled the Hippolytus of Euripides, agreed in detail with the account of Asclepiades preserved in schol. V Horn. X 321 (FHG III 305). According to him, Theseus, after marrying the daughter of Minos, desired to protect his son Hippolytus from possible injury at the hands

—4>AIAPA

295

of his stepmother, and consequently sent him to exercise the sovereignty at Troezen which he himself had inherited through Aethra. Phaedra, who had fallen in love with Hippolytus, built a temple to Aphrodite at Athens, and on her subsequent arrival at Troezen endeavoured to move Hippolytus to compliance. When he repulsed her overtures, she was alarmed and invented a counter-charge against him, accusing him to Theseus of having assailed her honour. Theseus believed her, and prayed to Poseidon that, by destroying Hippolytus, he would accomplish in his favour one of the three wishes which he had promised to fulfil for him. While Hippolytus was exercising his chariot on the shore, a bull came out of the sea, and the scared horses overturned the car and dragged Hippolytus to destruction. Phaedra, when her slander was exposed, hanged herself. The principal points in which this story differs from the extant play of Euripides are (1) the shamelessness of Phaedra's direct overtures ; and (2) the suicide of Phaedra after the detection of her treachery. Apollod. epit. 1. 18, 19 agrees in regard to both points, but makes no mention of Troezen. Diod. 4. 62 makes Phaedra return from Troezen to Athens and there give information to Theseus. In other respects his story is rationalized : the influence of Poseidon has disappeared, the fatal accident to Hippolytus was the consequence of" his mental agitation, and Phaedra's suicide was due to the fear of detection. Pausan. 1. 22. 2, who, though professing to give the Troezenian legend, clearly depends on Euripides, gives as Theseus's reason for the sending away of Hippolytus his desire to prevent any rivalry from arising between him and the children who might be born to Phaedra. But, although the currency of certain variations in the details of the story is established by these authorities, there is nothing to connect them with Sophocles. When Welcker suggests that the presentation of Phaedra by Sophocles differed entirely from the portrait with which we are familiar, that is probable enough ; but in assigning to the Sophoclean Phaedra a shameless hardness of character he is speculating without any evidence to support him. Hence his view was rightly rejected by Leo {fibs, in Senec. p. 174) and Kalkmann (de Hipp. Eur. p. 47). On the other hand, it is certain that in the Hippolytus KaXvinofievo^ of Euripides the character of Phaedra was represented in a much more odious light than in the revised play (TGF p. 491). Hence it has been suggested that the versions of Ovid {Her. 4) and of Seneca in his Phaedra, in which the same features appear, were derived wholly or in part from the 'ITTTTOXVTOS (see Wilamowitz, Anal. Eur. p. 209, and Herm. xv 483).

296

IO0KAE0YI

It must be admitted that we know little or nothing concerning the Phaedra of Sophocles which helps us to discover its character. It is, however, certain that in the course of the play Theseus returned from his unfortunate expedition to the underworld (see frs. 686, 687 with the nn.); and it is remarkable that the order of events is the same in Ovid (v. 109) and in Seneca (vv. 98, 225, 843). But it would be unsafe to infer further identity1 of treatment from that coincidence, for Euripides in his earlier play may have represented the absence of Theseus as due to the same cause (fr. 443). Kalkmann {l.c. p. 44) was perhaps justified in concluding from Ar. Ran. 1043 ff. that Sophocles' portrait of Phaedra must have been at least free from grosser traits; and, if that is so, her infatuation may have been excused as the consequence of her husband's desertion, who had abandoned her to assist his friend in a hopeless expedition. Similar suggestions have been made by R. Wagner, Epit. Vat. p. 143, and Gruppe, p. 6o62, as well as by Ilberg in Roscher III 2223, who thinks that Sophocles' play in point of date came between the two plays of Euripides. On the other hand, Wilamowitz is confident that the Phaedra of Sophocles was subsequent to the extant Hippolytus, and that its principal purpose was to reinstate the reputation of the heroine. He argues {Eur. Hipp. p. 57) that fr. 682 is part of a polemic directed against the Euripidean standpoint, that fr. 683 perhaps refers to the political debate in the Supplices, and that the expedition to the underworld was reintroduced into the story with the specific object explained above. 1 Weil, Sept tragedies d'Euripide, p. 6, thinks the lines unsuitable to the supposed occasion, on the ground that Theseus had fortunately escaped from peril. But, though his life had been saved by Heracles, his own expedition was a disastrous failure. However this may be, in the extant Hippolytus the absence of Theseus is differently accounted for (792), and the whole scheme of his residence at Troezen (34) is inconsistent with the undertaking of an expedition to the underworld. Observing that Seneca laid the scene of action at Athens, we are entitled to infer that a play which introduced the return from Hades would agree also with Seneca in the matter of locality. The inference is valid for Sophocles, but is obviously less cogent in regard to the KohvirTbii.a'os. No weight can be assigned to the reading of the MSS in the Argument of Aristophanes: i) aK-qv^ TOU Spdparos ev 617/Sais KCITOU. This patent blunder is usually corrected to iv Tpoifijci. Schwartz however emended : iv < Tpoiffivi Kal 06 Ka.06.wep TOV irporipov iv> 'A6r)vcus, and Murray accepts iv 'Adr/vais, thinking that it may apply to the earlier play. Eitrem's conclusions on these points (PaulyWissowa VIII 1865) are much too positive. Wilamowitz made much of his contention that in the /caXrari/tei'os Theseus escaped from Hades by means of the second of the three wishes which Poseidon had promised to fulfil. The only solid support for his argument is the statement of schol. Eur. Hipp. 887, which says nothing at all about Euripides.

ct>AIAPA

297

677 ou yap hiKaiov avSpa yevvalov peva<; OTTOV ye ju,i) Si/cata rip\\seTai. 6 7 7 . 2 b'wov ye /irj Schneidewin: OTOV /J.T] ical Stobaeus, #7rou ye Orion, 8wov T4 7; Blaydes | ripireTai Orion 6 7 7 Stob. flor. 17. 1 (in p. 490, 1 Hense) So^oxXeous QaiSpg. (MA: TOO airov <pa..,S). 'oi.. .rip^erai.' Also in Orion flor. 6. 7 p. 49, 15, with the lemma

importing a specific reference to the senses. Cf. Ant. 315 6 bpuv a' aviq. ras <j>p£vas T& S' WT' 4yil>, Eur. Ion 1180 us daaaov l\8wp£va. occurs in Eur. Or. 1176, Hclid. 663, 939.—Y« is normal in a relative to Hippolytus.—4>p«'vas should be taken clause with causal implication : see on with- ripweLv. It would be unnecessary fr. 84, and cf. Eur. Or. 544 ey& TOL irpbs to point this out, if EUendt had not p-qv or, as distributed in itsTI \VW/IIT£U> <j>piva.—Tep>|/eTai is better than TipTrerai.: 'where his joy is like to functions, (pphes, is often the central be shameful.' For the gnomic force of consciousness not yet distinguished as the future tense see Gildersleeve, Greek reason, will, or sensation : cf. fr. 636. 3 evSoio-y tppevi. Here we should accord- Syntax, § 258; and for the fut. midd. with passive sense cf. Ant. 691. ingly render by heart or mind, without

678 Xoyovs 6 7 8 Hesych. I p. 234 diriirrvae with Euripides the metaphor is losing its \6yovs ' airefiij^aTO TOVS \6yovs, avrl rod force : in Hel. 664 aire'irTvtTa [lev \6yov} aTrearpacpi). 2OOK\% $al5pq.. Phryn, olov otov eo-oljo/j.a.1 the verb is simply ' I praep. soph. p. 49, 12 de B. (Bekk. loathe.' Hence dir^Trruira ('Far be it anecd. p. 28, 8) aTrovriaai Xiyous' airopfrom me!') as an emphatic formula by pfyai Kal [IT] Tpoffiirdat. which the speaker dissociates himself from a thought suggested to him : Hec. The same phrase for rejection is found 1276, Hipp. 614, / . T. 1161. The rein Aesch. Eum. 303 dXV AiroTrrius \6yovs : cf. Eur. / . A. 874 TTUS; aire'irTvcr', ference was almost certainly to Hippo1 lytus. (2 yepate , fivdof ou yap ev poveis. But

679 crvyyvcoTe Kavda^ccrde criyuxjat- TO yap yvvaL^lv alcr^pbv crvv yvvaiKa Sei cnkyz.iv. 679.

2 ffbv yvvaiKa del Mtineke : o~i)v yvvaud SeT A, ev yvvaud Set S, ev yvvtuKi

XPV M

Xpewv j Koo'jxeiv yvvaitias rds yvvaiKelas 6 7 9 Stob. flor. 74. 16 (iv p. 575, 14 voo-ovs. The reading of A would mean, Hense) 2o0o/cAijs iv iaidpa. 'g-Cyyvone ' you should help a woman to conceal a ...o-rfyeiv.' woman's shame': see e.g. Xen. anab. 3. For the general sense cf. Eur. Amir. 2 TOV..,ivTVy\6.vovTa 955ffvyyvoiGTa.piv vvv o~ol rad', dXX' b'fius . 3 1 rjv ^/7](pi
IO*OKAEOYI

298

aiv T$ apxovn Ko\dfeiv. But we want rather, ' you as a woman should help me to conceal a woman's shame.' Hence J. rightly adopted Meineke's conjecture, comparing for the adverbial use of triv Ant. 85 Kpvtpr) 8e KeSde, aiv 8' aiirws eyd, and id. 432
Sophocles the prep, is placed at the beginning of the clause (Kuehner-Gerth, § 445, 6 : but cf. fr. 796). The substitution of ywaiKt was a natural error (see on fr. 659i 5)> a n ( J iv a n ( i <"&" a r e constantly confounded (fr. 724, Cobet, V.L. p. 199, Coll. Crit. p. 293).—'Nauck formerly conj. eD yvvalKa. del ariyeiv. He now reads, after Vitelli and F . W. Schmidt, Set yvvam' ael a-rtyeai (quite unwarrantably). R. Ellis prefers iv yvvaud Set ariyeiv, " i n the case of a woman " : but this seems weak here, where only women are in question. Worst of all is Cobet's T V yvvaiKa 8et ariyew.' (J.) Add that Grotius adopted iv yvvat^l, and Ellendt aiv yvvaigl Set ariyeiv. P. Schroeder proposed avyytivaiKa,. H. conj. ctyQo'av (or (nyiiarif) in v. 1, following Nauck, as I suppose, in v. 2 : this is as if the speaker's silence were alone in question. —For crrfyeiv cf. Track. 596, and for dvdoi 5t avyKpiirTOvotv oUelas /3Xd/?as.

68o fjiev, w yuvcu/ces, ovh' av e?s (ftvyot irod', & Kal Zeus i
2 iipopfLrjarj SM, itpopix^aoL A

6 8 O Stob. flor. 108. 53 (iv p . 970, 9 Hense) So0o/c\eous QiS fo

n«v. The Greeks saw a contrast everywhere, and sometimes overdid i t : so here there is no real opposition between the /tteV- and 5^-clauses, but the Se-clause corroborates the yuev-clause. ' Since heaven-sent disgrace cannot be avoided, we must bear it.' See also Jebb on Ai. 622 ff. Holzner, quoting such passages as Aesch. fr. 362 oilr' iv ariyri ns ijfievos Trap' etrrlq, | (peiyet ri fiaXKov TOV TreTpwp.e'vov nbpov, and E u r . Hclid. 615 ii&po-tfia 8' otfri <j>vyeiv di/jus,

proposed to substitute a xprf f° r citcrxvBut the context probably warranted the mention of disgrace, to avoid which was Phaedra's special concern in Eur. Hipp. 5 ff8ff 4 9 2 Brunck was not justified in reading

if ye (if irep Dobree, olai Hermann), for KO.1 after the relative is entirely idiomatic. It marks the statement of the relative clause as corresponding to, sometimes actually as limiting, that of the main sentence: see e.g. Dem. 5. 16 ra2 yap ai (Tvjx^iaxlat TOUTOV e"xovcn. TOV Tpbirov, uv Kal (ppovTlaeiev av 715. T h i s simple

use of Kal has also troubled the editors in Horn. A 249.—cop)i.i](rT), immiserit. This use of the verb does not occur elsewhere in tragedy, but is Homeric (r 165) and Ionic : see Lexx. For the omission of av see on fr. 659, 4. Cf. 0. C. 252 oti yap tSoit av aBpSsv fipoT&v, \ Saris av, el debt ayoi, j iK
3 voo-ovs, generally of mental distraction. See on fr. 650. Probably the passion of love is intended here, as in Track. 445.—For the general sentiment see on frs. 585, 964.

AIAPA

299

681 TO

OVK

S' evTV^ovvTa TTCLVT'

ecrTLv

VT ' OVTOS OVTCV'

evprjcreis eva.

6 8 1 . 1 TO8' eirvxovvra M : rb 5' eirvxelv A 2 'iva codd.: fort, ivbv 6 8 1 Stob. flor. 105. 39 (iv p. 939, ovros wpa.yp.ar' d0/ai}v holding the play to be late]; of/cos—or del trrdvra. e*Krbs...ovK eanv fiirtxis bvvr}?j
200KAE0YI

30O

682 yvvatKO<s ov&ev av ^eitpv KCLKOV j dvr/p KTijcraiT' av ovSe cra)(j)povo<; KpeL<j(Tov nadcov S' e/cacrros a>v rv)(rj Xeyeu. 682.

3 /ueifoi/ Kptitsaov primitus S : corr. S 1

1 otiroi F. W. Schmidt

6 8 2 Stob. Jlor. 69. 14 (iv p. 527, 15 the result of the previous discussion, and deprecating the universal hatred of women Hense) SOI^OKXIJS Qaldpa. ' o8rw...X£y«.' preached by Euripides in the Hippolytus. The earliest occurrence of this piece of 2 KTijcraiT' civ : Nauck conjectured proverbial philosophy is in Hes. Op. 700 \jj els vwepfioVtiv | iricpvK' iradiliv holds the place of emphasis, since &/j.etvov' diafpipovffi 5' al *j>6v Si re vifinos tyvui (Horn. P 32 a rare usage, which occurs in Sophocles pe_x6iv Si re vr/irios tyvu): see also Blomperhaps only at Ant. 677 OBTWS afivvri' field on Aesch. Ag. 170 (187). The iv TVXV have been needlessly suspected: av T&XV (SC. waddiv) Campbell, and independently Gomperz, proposed eiSws av \iyoi or av SIKTJ ^iyoi Blaydes, ofroi, which is accepted by Nauck. But, oTS' us «S \iyoi Herwerden. They point though oiira seems unnatural, it is rash to the conception of marriage as a lottery, to alter it in the absence of the context. with Fortune as sole arbitress: cf. pseud, In Aesch. Sufpl. 779 Schuetz proposed Epich. (fr. 35 p. 265 Lorenz) rb Si ya/xetv O0TOI in the place of an inferential OCTU : but he has not succeeded in convincing the editors. See also on Eur. Hel. 810. rtixys Pd\elv are., Eur. fr. T056 ffVfupopa Wilamowitz (Eur. Hipp. p. 57) quotes 8 5s av TVXV i KaKrjs yvvaiKbs, evrvx*? 5' Eur. Ion 400, which is not an instance, i(T$\fis TVX&V. For the subj. without av see on fr. 659, 4. and Suppl. 917, which is doubtful. He argues that the speaker is summing up

683 ov yap

TTOT' av ykvoiT

av dcraXrj^

iv T) TO. fiev SIKGUO, Kal TO, craxfrpova XdySiqv TrareiTai, /cwrtXos 8' avr/p \a/3a>v Travovpya ^epcrlv Kevrpa S 683. 1 yivoivr av Stob. S, 7^01x0 A | aa<pa\eis xiXeis Stob. S (dff0aXi?s TTAXIS corr. m. pr.), wripaXqs TTOXCIS M 4 xePalv schol. Luc.: xeP°^v Stob. SMA | nivrpa Stob.: ipya schol. Luc. | KySttioi. schol. Luc. ""'' ^ " 6 8 3 Stob. Jlor. 4 3 . 5 (iv p. 2, 7 Hense) ^oipoxXiovs Qaldpa. 'ov yap... ir6\iv.' Schol. Lucian. p. 199, 21 Rabe Xaf 7raT?j
1—4 'Translate: "That city can never attain to safety, in which justice and virtue are trampled under heel; while a babbler directs the state, with the goad of mischief in his hands." The wordy

4>AIAPA demagogue is likened to a reckless driver. The irayovp-ya KeWpa are the evil incentives which he applies to the citizens.' (J.) The figure is not so completely worked out that we should think of the Srjpos as a team urged by a malicious charioteer to trample under foot his more scrupulous opponents. So Theogn. 846 Xd£ iirl^a d-fi/iy Keve6
phocles appears to follow Solon fr. 36 (Arist. Ath. pol. 12. 4) Kivjpav S' aWos &s £yw AajScui/, j KaKoQpafrqs re Kal
Whether in using Kivrpa. he implied anything more than a symbol of power, —or, in other words, whether he was consciously suggesting the mental incentives by which the demagogue sways his hearers,—must remain uncertain, although the word Kivrpov often bears the latter meaning (e.g. in Aesch. Eum. 430). It is curious that xivrpa occurs, though with a different application, in the similar context of Eur. Suppl. 240 ff. ot 5' oi)/c

301

?X o t / T e s -"^ s TOI)S ^xovras KevTp' d
\O6/J.CVOL. Wilamowitz assumes a direct reference to this passage: see Introductory Note.—For v. 1 Nauck quotes Eur. Suppl. 447 TTWS ovv £T' av yevotr' av ivxvpa TT6\CS ; Ar. Av. 829 Kal TUJS av '4ri

ytvoir' av eHraKros w6\is; See on Hel. 77. —a
(J.) xePa^v iravovpyos, Blaydes. — KtjScvci TTOXLV. Herwerden conj. KT]de/xwv ir^Xet, to avoid the awkwardness of w6\i.v after v. 1. But the idiom is the same as that explained by Jebb on 0. C. 424.

684 p yap avSpas ov fiovovs p^ ovS' av yvvdiKas, dXXa Kal decov ava> \jfv)(a<; rapacrcrei KOLTTI TTOVTOV e p ^ e r a r 684.

3 rapdaaei Clem.: xaP^IT
6 8 4 Stoh.jlor. 63. 25 (iv p. 440, 16 Hense) 2o(poK\eovs Qatlpa (so MA, roO avrou QaiSpai S [The extract follows Track. 441 ff.]>. ' Ipus yap.. .tyKkivtrai.'1 vv. 1—3 are quoted by Clem. Alex. strom. 6 p. 745, and attributed by him to Euripides: 'AvaKpiovros yap woLrjaavTos (fr. 65) "Epojra yap TOV appbv ^\irop,ai... Eipuridrisypa<j>u '"Epus...fyxerai..' Nauck consequently assumed that the error lay with Stobaeus, and remarked that the style clearly betrayed the hand of Euripides. There is no definite peculiarity of diction which can be used as evidence ; and here, as in fr. 941, Nauck was influenced rather by the reflective tone than by considerations of vocabulary and structure. Such impressions are often illusory; and, if the external evidence is examined alone, it appears somewhat more probable that Clement (or his source) erred in naming Euripides, than that the anthologist blundered in the

name of the play as well as in that of the author. Elter and Hense both think that Stobaeus was right, and the latter adds that the style is not remarkable in a late play. Musgrave took the view that the first three lines belonged to Euripides, and the last two to Sophocles. For the general sense cf. fr. 941, 9—15 with the nn., and observe that Beuv dvoi echoes iv 0eois avw in v. 12. 1 eirepxeTcu, 'attacks,' as in Horn. h. Pan. 33 8d\e yap irbdos vypbs iirt\8wv yu^0j; iw\oKdiJ.if Apvoiros 0IX6TT;TI ^177;vai. 3 See cr. n. xa/3c"r though preferred by Nauck and Dindorf, requires justification, as used to describe the action of love ; or, if it is interpreted ' moves to anger,' one might expect the allusion to be made more definite. Tapacro-u is applied to the divisions caused by the passion of love in Ant. 794, and Aristophonfr. 11, 11 280 K. (Love was banished

IOOKAEOYZ

3O2

/ecu rovS" direipyew ovS' 6 irayKpar-qs crdevei Zeus, aXX' vneiKei, Kal dekav i X 5 KOV 0i\av coni. Herwerden by t h e gods) iraparre Kaicelvovs y&p 4/i.[3&Wwi> <7T&
rather denotes the turmoil set up within the breast by the invasion of love: cf. Eur. Hipp. 969 Srav rapd^ Ktiwpis ^j3fiaav ippiva. Thus it is ' to agitate,' as applied to that which causes emotion in general: cf. Eur. Bcuch. 1322, and (perhaps) fr. 1079, 4. 5 See cr. n. Herwerden's Koi 6i\tav is at first sight attractive, and removes the logical inconsequence of a willing

submission to restraint. Musgrave had previously conjectured yeXdv as ' elegantius.' But 64\av is well-adapted to the easy sway of Love: cf. fr. 941, 15 Aios Tvpavvei

ir\evfi6vo)i>

avev

Sopds, \ dvev

685 dW 685

eurl jJLTjTpl TrcuSes dynvpai

Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 18,19 (Bekk.

anecd. p . 338, 16) dynvpai- 4K ixera(popas ai datpaXeiat. 2O0OKX?JS. 'aW...filov.' Hesych. I p . 24 AyKvpaf /leTacpopiKws a i d
'E/td/Su (79). An anchor was a symbol of security, and, inasmuch as anchors were often used to ride out a storm, also of hope. The former idea is prominent in O.C. 148

fiCov.

ixov-q, I ir6(Hv iroB' rfeuv KTC., Heliod. 4.

19 XapUXeid 1101. [ilos r/v, eXiris Kal SS y p ] p^xh us einetv ayKvpa. Neil on Eq. 1244 seems to hesitate unnecessarily over the identification of f7r' iXxiSos 6xei
l

don't

let them have two strings to their bow.' Blaydes on Ar. Lys. 31 has collected a dyxvpa ardyris (?), and may be so here. number of more or less relevant examBut there is generally combined with it ples. that of hope for the future: Eur. Hel. Welcker thought that the Nurse was 277 (n.) ayKXipa 8' ij ixov rets ri^xas c3x« speaking to Phaedra in remonstrance. KOLTTL viiiKpois fj.£yas oipfiovv, E u r . fr. 8 6 6 ?j5e /xoi rpocpos, j p-qrrip, aSeKtji-q, 5/x«is,

686 dp' ovhe yrjs evepd' w^ou davav; > ov yap irpb ^oipas r] TV^TJ y S i ^ 686.

2 Thesei nomen add. Nauck

6 8 6 Stob. eel. 1. 5. 13 p. 77, 4 W. expedition with Pirithous to the nether So0o/cX^s Qaibpq, (so F , but P omits the world : see Introductory Note. Observe lemma). ' ?f?;s...^idfeTai.' the correspondence of the situation with This fragment is of considerable imOv. Her. 4. 109 tempore abest, aberitque portance, as showing that during part of diu Neptunius heros: \ ilium Pirithoi dethe action Theseus was absent on his linet ora sui.

4>AIAPA

3O3

1 ^T|s ap': ' so you are alive, not dead ground of the omission of the lemma in and gone, as we thought ?' The imperthe Paris Ms. But he accepted as genuine fects are practically equivalent to presents, (fr. 611) certain lines which appear to be expressing a sudden appreciation of the ascribed to our play by Stob. eel. 1. 5. real state of affairs: see on fr. 577, 1. 11 p. 76, 11 (v. Wachsmuth in loc.) —The pleonastic repetition of the idea in irepidiaC &<j>VKTa re | /i-f/Sea ?rai'ToSaxav negative form lends emphasis: cf. Eur. ftovXav adafiavTivaLs j valv€Tai KeptcLtnv Phoen. 596, 906. al
687 ecrawev ovpa

/A'

ona. tcvWaivcov

KO.T(I).

6 8 7 tarai £iroipav£iTiKvd\dvvwv Kal TO cod.: corr. Hemsterhuis, Brunck, Hiller 6 8 7 Hesych. II p. 551 KvXXaivov ffaivwv o~\ oTrorav 5eiiri>7Js, KT€. I do not (KvXahwv cod.) Karw. 1iO(poKX9js Qaidpa.understand how ioaw' iir' ovpdv, which Dind. accepted, can be defended ( " h e TO. t3ra KaraflaXwv, airep (owep Dind., T^Trep Nauck) 01 GOLIVOVTES irotou- made a waggling movement towards the i tail," L. Campbell).' (Tiv. '4aTai...Kal rb.' The corrupt words of the quotation Leo, with whom Nauck agrees, conwere emended to Za'aivev ovpav wra.../cdrw jectured that the allusion is to Cerberus. by Hemsterhuis (facuv' or' ovpav Jensius). In that case, Theseus is describing his Brunck went a step further with iaaivev descent to Hades, and it is perhaps some (^aaiivt' 11 Blaydes) ovpa rwra, modified confirmation of this view that Horace, with TWTC by Herwerden and /J.' wre by speaking of the descent of Orpheus (C. 2 r E. Hiller. On the other hand, Nauck - 3- 33)> says: quid mirum, tibi illis accepted Naber's vdra with Brunck's carminibus stupens \ dimittit atras ielua gtratvev ovpa. But, as J. remarks, Cyra cenliceps | aures ? Cf. Hes. Theog. 770 (or wre) is clearly right, as is shown not (of Cerberus) & fifr i&vTas | crcuVei 6/J.CQS only by the gloss in Hesych., but by ovprj re Kal oijacriv a[L<por£pouriv | e^ekBetv Horn, p 302 obpri niv p' 0 7'ftriji-eKai 8' OVK alms ia irahiv. Welcker with less oflara Kdf}f3a\ev a/jupai, which Sophocles probability supposed that the reference probably had in his mind. J. adds: ' I f was to a hound of Hippolytus. — For iaaivev oipg, /j.' be read, cp. for the ace. Kara = downwards, cf. Ant. 5 2 X 5 X Ar. Eq. 1030 Kiva. Kfp^epov... \ 8s Kepia? m r w ddicpv' elj3ofj.4v7].

688

(j ovaC 688

aeWdSes cod. Leid.: aeXAcu vulgo

6 8 8 Etym. M. p. 19, 53 aeXXap constant association of cteXXa is with the avaTpoa.L5pa. f^ois ctAXcus. So de\X6irovs from Homer It may be taken as certain that the onwards. Cf. O. T. 466 deXXaSav '(wwoiv, meaning is 'storm-swift voices,' for the O.C. 1081 aeXXcu'a weXeias. It should be

3°4

IOOKAEOYI the rumour coming to Theseus of the death of Phaedra; but we cannot even tell whether there is so much as an allusion to the proverbial swiftness of Fame, for which cf. Horn, w 412 "Oo"
added that the grammarians regularly interpret the metaphorical use of deXXds, deXXdVous, by means of the gloss ra%i% without mentioning any other. Hence we may exclude Campbell's alternative version 'voices of the storm,' and Valckenaer's attempt to bring the phrase into line with •ipcii x^bvios in Eur. Hipp. 1301. Welcker guessed that
689 ayos 6 8 9 Hesych. I p. 30 #705 • ayvurpui, Frazer, G.B.^ll p.304; Pausan.w p. 138) Bvaia ((Ovalas cod.). Cf. have made it easy for us to understand how ) 2OO5OKX^S ^ $alSpa. p a word with similar associations to those of # I Bekk. anecd. p. 330, 31 #yos' KOT'' OVTIiaoi...a-qfxalvei. ik Kalthe savage 'taboo' might be used equally well for objects of reverence and abhorayvitrfia Kal Bvalav. rence: see on fr. 253. Thus, whatever is The double meaning of 0170s is often consecrated to a god may be 0170s, but affirmed: Suid. s.v. is practically identhere is no other extant example of this tical with Bekk. anecd. Eustath. //. P- "357> 59 To T°v ayovs SnrKbo-ttixov. sense except Ant. 775, a passage which Etym. M. p. 12, 26 a'yosffTjfxaipet5i5o, T6 seems to require that TO&OVTOV should be re Kadapbv, Sirep Kvplw Kal TO pvwapdv, made correlative to SITUS rather than to liis. Curtius, who referred the meanings Kara ivrtyptunv. Schol. Soph. O. T. 656 070s yap rb lepbv o-^/3as...Kar' eitprifwrfibv to two separate roots, wished to write de Kal Tct juaff/xaTct. &yi) \4yerat, but of the 070s in Ant. I.e. But it is hard to believe in the entire dissociation of 470s ( = pXaafia) former meaning he can give no better from ayvbs; and the evidence, such as it example than 01717 /t' l x e l (Horn. 221). Schol. O.C. 1526 KaBapd- afip-alvei yap is, favours the retention of the smooth breathing. Kal TO 470s TOOTO. Anthropologists (e.g.

69O

a/cXenroi 69O

Hesych. I p. 99 SKXCTTTOI" oi

Tapa\oyt£6/J.evoi, a\i)0eis. Sooio/cX^s $a(Spq (-ois cod.). The meaning of the verbal adj. corresponds to the use of K\4TT
note. To the illustrations there quoted add Plut. Timol. 17 Kkhrrwv rrfii avfi/iaX'a", Arat. 10 KKtyw. rd irpdyfiaTa, coni. praec. 19 p. 140 D oidevi yap Be&v Upa KKeirTbfieva Kal \av8avovTa dparat Kexapiafiivus inrb yvvaiKbs. It is assumed that the word was attached to some such noun as X6701, and that the verbal is n o t ' active.' Tucker on Aesch. Cho. 853 apparently analyses otherwise.

69I 6 9 1 Hesych. I p. 328 aiTop.6\w$• vpoSoTiKws. Socio(cX))s $al5pa. The gloss afiTOfj.6\t*)5' TrpoSoTiKws, but without the addition Sooio/cX-ijs Qaldpa, occurs also in Bekk. anecd. p. 466, 7, and in Suid. s.v.

In the latter it is followed by Kal airofAoXrjaai earl TO irpoSovvai. TOIIS iSiovs KTL On these facts Nauck bases the uawarrantable conjecture that the words 2o<£oKX?)5 $al5pa have accidentally attached

4>AIAPA—00IQTIAEZ themselves to the wrong gloss in Hesychius, and that they really belong to atiToiraida (fr. 1029). avTopoXos and its cognates seem not to occur in literature before Herodotus. During the Peloponnesian War the word acquired a special significance at Athens owing to the wholesale desertion of the slave population (Ar. Eq. 21 ff., Thuc. 7.

692

27).

3O5

The verb is applied to turncoats in

Aeschin. 3. 75 01/ (rvfj.fi.eTaTriirTei rots atiro-

jjioXodaiv iv T7J 7ro\tTei'^. Here possibly the reference was to the betrayal of Phaedra's secret without her consent, just as in Eur. Hipp. 591 ff. the Chorus say to Phaedra when the Nurse's attempt fails: irpo645ol\wv.

Hesych. I p. 347 a^etph' dtpp&v-

term may perhaps be found in Horace's atra cura and Pindar's fiiXaivav Kapbiav p . 476, I &*{/€pbvTitjTOv. otirw (fr. 123). Cf. Hesych. II p. 438 Kara2O0OKX^S. \pt£<j>os) and Pindar's ^e0>;c6s or 45 ^Sw rb \VTT&. p6s (Nan. 3. 71). The common TKTTOV.

SO0OKXTJS $al5p
Bekk. anecd.

693 693

Hesych. Ill p. 135 fiii\vs' o

irapetfievr). Nauck supposed that tie/iwXwfifrT) was the word attributed to Sophocles, and naturally felt some distrust of the tradition. The same view is assumed by Ellendt, and seems to have been inherited from Brunck. But it is more probable that (luXvs is the lemma to which the

whole gloss belongs, and that it was used by Sophocles as a feminine adjective, being thus equivalent to ixeixwKvaiiivi], i.e. irapufifrrj. For the meaning see schol. Nic. Ther. 32 /iuXus 5e flpadvs Kai raffiis fj fj.oyep6f •>) vuxe\?js xai cbraX<5s, 6 yeyripaKHIS 6
M. Schmidt corrects Cyrill. 63 to juuSXus" 6 neixuhvaixivos, which favours the view taken above.

00IQTIAEI The subject of this play is unknown, as Welcker's identification with the Peleus hasa been shown (p. 142) to be untenable. Aristotle {poet. 18. I456 1) cited the Phthiotides as an example of a tragedy of character. The title warrants us in assuming (1) that the action of the play took place at Phthia, and (2) that the female interest was prominent. These conditions do not fit Campbell's guess that the subject was the education of Achilles. But it is not easy to find an appropriate story. p. 11.

306

S0*0KAE0YS

Perhaps the most likely solution is that Phthiotides was an alternative title to the Hermione1. In that case fr. 695 might be referred to Peleus and Phoenix, whom Hyginus {fab. 257) includes in a list of examples of mutual friendship. Fr. 696 might be connected with the parricidal impulse to which Phoenix confesses in Horn. I 458—461; but I should prefer to explain it in reference to the claim made by Neoptolemus against Apollo that he should pay the penalty for the death of Achilles : see Eur. Andr. 53, 1108, Or. 1657. Then irarpoKTovo^ 8IKT) would be a 'trial for slaying the father of another,' just as in Eur. Or. 193 Electra calls Clytaemnestra irarpofyovov fiarpos, and in Soph. Track. 1125 Heracles describes Deianira to Hyllus as irarpo(pOVTOV fl7]Tp6<;.

Ahrens conjectured that the subject-matter was taken from the earlier adventures of Peleus, as related by Apollod. 3. 163 ff., and particularly from the tragic, incidents which followed his marriage to Antigone the daughter of Eurytion.

694 veos Tr4(f>VKa<;' noWa KCLL TTOXA.' aKovcraL

KO.1 fj,adeiv ere oei,

KOX StSa<jfcecr#ai

6 9 4 Stob. eel. II 31.16,p. 204, 18W.

emphasis to the following words(='e'en').

2O0OKWOUS QOioiTiduv (tpoiarB L : corr. There is a similar instance in Phil. 13 Gaisford). 'v{os...na.Kp&.' The extract p.^ icai fiuBy p ' T\KOVTO. KOLKX^ TO irav \ is immediately followed by the line del
OIQTIAEI—*IAOKTHTHZ

307

695 yepa>v yepovra

cr eyot.

6 9 5 Aul. Gell. 13. 19. 3 sed etiam Me versus non mimes notus 'y4pwv...£y&' et in tragoedia Sophocli scriptus est, cui tirulus est $0iw-n5es ((piXorides codd. : corr. Casaubon), et in Bacchis Kuripidi (193)-

For ircuSciYwyw as applied to the old see on fr. 487. The possibility of coincidence is somewhat greater here than in the case of fr. 14 (n.); or the line in the Bacchae may have been a conscious echo of Sophocles.

696 StKTj

av avrw 696.

696

2 KCKXfjr' Cobet:

Bekk. attecd. p. 128, 5 6 av

T' vulg.

we cannot tell whether the trial in ques-

ffijvdeiTfjLos (TvvTa
The form KCKXTIT' Kas been restored by Cobet (N.L. p. 224) with general approval, as the context indicates that the grammarian was dealing with the optative. For the form cf. Phil. 119, Jebb on 0. T. 49 ; and for the accent Chandler, § 786.—SCKTJV KaX«tv is used of the pre-

tion' which lies in thefuture(Gildersleeve, §§ 288, 440).—iraTpoKTovos 8£KT|.

The

present passage might be used to show that /j.TjTpoKT6vovs ^uiras in Eur. Tro. 363 refers to the trial of Orestes (dtKijv a'1/j.aros /j.7]TpoKT6vov Or. 1649), and not, as it appears generally to be taken, to the murder sident of t h e court (deafj.o8er7]^y &px<*>v, itself. There is no ground for writing iraror as the case may be): Ar. Vesp. 1441 PSKTOVOS here, as suggested by Ellendt and £ws S.v TY]V HKTJV ap%wv KOATJ, Blaydes on preferred by Blaydes, as if the sense were Nub. 780. The force of the perfect opta' concerning a slain father.' See n. on fr. tive with av may be given thus: ' he 11, and particularly ElmsleyonEur. Bacch. would find himself in court (with his 139, who pointed out that these adjeccase called on) on a trial for homicide.' tives have an active force. For the referObserve that, in the absence of context, ence of the words see Introductory Note.

IAOKTHTHI 0 EN TPOIAI There cannot be much doubt that the leading events recorded in the Philoctetes at Troy were the healing of Philoctetes, and his slaying of Paris. The Little Iliad contained the earliest version of the story of which we have any knowledge. The abstract of Proclus (EGF p. 36) runs thus : fierd ravra 'OSuo-crei;? Xo-^rjaa^ "ILXevov \a/jL{3avei, teal XpijaavTos irepl Trj9 aXdxrea)'; TOVTOV AtotfB

IK Atjfivov

<&i\oKTr}Tr)v avdyei.

Kal fj,ovofia'xr]cra<; 'A\e^dvBpw

laOels Be OVTO? VTTO M a -

KTeivei,- teal JOV ve/cpov virb

3o8

IO0OKAEOYZ

M.eve\dov KaraiKiadevra avekofievoi Qatnovaiv

ol Tpa>e<;. The

death of Paris, the original offender, which Philoctetes alone was destined to achieve, was the climax towards which the action of the play was directed. There is nothing in the extant fragments which gives any clue concerning the development of the plot. The events in question are summarized in the prophetic speech of Heracles in Phil. 1423ff.:iXOwv&e avv TOSS' dvSplirp6<; TO TpcoiKOi' I TroXiGfia, irpSiTov /J.ev voaov travarj \vypd<>, \ apery re irpS)TO<; eiacpifdeis arparevp,aTO^ \ Yldpiv fiev, 05 ravS' a'trios tcaicwv e(f>v, I To^oiai Tot? ifioicri voa(f)iel<; j3iov, \ irepaeis r e TpoLav /ere.

Further on (v. 1437) ^ e promises : ija) S' 'Aa/cXrjTudv \ -Trava-rrjpa •jre^w o-?7? voaov 7rpo? "l\iov. This raises a difficulty, because in v. 1333 Neoptolemus had assured Philoctetes, on the authority of Helenus, that the sons of Asclepius would effect his cure. It has not been satisfactorily explained why Sophocles allowed an inconsistency, of which he must have been aware, to appear after so short an interval. It is therefore idle to speculate whether the writer of this play, like most of the later authorities1, followed the Little Iliad in ascribing to Machaon the performance of the cure, or whether he agreed with the minority2 in preferring Podalirius. Dindorf prints with the fragments of this play (fr. 632) two lines which are twice quoted by Plutarch {an seni sit ger. resp. 9 p. 789 A, Solon 20) as addressed to Philoctetes : T/S S' av ere vv^t), rt? Be 7rdp6evo<; via SegaiT av ; ev yovv 009 ryapeiv e^et?, raXa?.

Hermann first assigned these lines to the present play, which he strangely thought was satyric. They had previously been ascribed to Euripides; but Matthiae took a different line, in referring them to the Philoctetes of Strattis (in 609 K.). Herwerden argued that the lines must be tragic, on the ground that in comedy the vocative of Ta\ai is always rdXav {Exerc. Crit. p. 87). It is not clear that the criterion applies, but in the present state of our knowledge Nauck is right in classing the fragment with the tragic adespota (fr. 10); for it is either tragic, or paratragoedic. Blaydes (on Soph. Phil. 357) thought that the line ov Trat? 'A^tXXew?, a'XX' iKetvo^ avTos el (Tr. fr. adesp. 363) might have been taken from the Philoctetes at Troy. But, if Sophoclean at all, it is more relevant to the plot of the Scyrians. 1

See e.g. schol. Find. Pyth. i. 109, Prop. 1. 1. 59. Apollod. epit. 5. 8 (Machaon has already been killed by Penthesilea). Qu. 9. 461 ff. (Machaon was one of the victims of Eurypylus, 6. 392 ff.; the arrival of Philoctetes is much later than in the Little Iliad). 2

IAOKTHTHI

309

697 fiov 697

OTTCOS yi/q

Priscian.Insl. 18. 169 (11 p. 284,

7) ' fiaptivofiai TO6TOV' Kai 'inrb TOVTOV' KO.1 ' TOIJTijJ.' 2 O 0 O K X ? ) S 4V QLXOKTTJTT} Tip eV 1

Tpola ' 6
dvri

TOO vwb rrjs

The Paris cod. 7499 (O) has fibvov us for ixov SITUS, whence Porson conjectured ixbvov onus. But to this the rhythm is an insuperable objection. Dindorf proposed dafirjs SITUS uov...irov, Campbell bo-fiTJs OTTWS TOI, E. A. I. Ahrens fxev ovv us. It seems most likely, however, that Priscian's authority shifted the order of the words in order to enforce his grammatical point by putting b(r/xijs first: thus, the original may have been b'irois < be > ^77 [Sapwd-qo-eo-di fiov \ do-fiijs.

T h e gram-

marian's remark is illustrated by Phil. 890

IXT) J3apvv8u>t!iv wurg | dfffirj irpb TOV

Siovros. For the so-called causal genitive in Sophocles, appearing especially after verbs which express anger, pity,

fiapvv6i]crecr6e wonder, and the like, cf. Ant. 1177 Trarpl l^qviaas tpdvov, El. 920 rijs avolas u s ff' iiroiKrlpu, id. 1027 f?;Xw (re TOV VOV, rrjs Sk SeiXfos , O. T. 48 (at) aoirijpa KXijfei rijs irdpos irpo0vixLa$, Ai. I I 1 7 roO 5^ aov \pb<pov j OVK hv ffTpa(pelT]v, Track. 287 diifiara | pt£u Trarpdxj) Zijci rrjs a\
(Teas. The construction is less remarkable, where the genitive is—partly at any rate—supported by a noun: see Ai. 41, Track. 269, O.T. 697, Phil. 327, 751, 1308. Yet (e.g.) in Ai. I.e. x^V fiv-pwdeis TCOV 'AxiXXetwy b'ir\wv it is clear that b'-wKav is at least as much affected by

papmSeis as by x^V- Delbrlick, Vergl. Synt. § 89, treats some of these genitives as ablatival in origin, but it is very hard to draw the line between the genitive and ablative which probably fell together. Blaydes's proposal to read oo-firj is uncritical.

698 aW

£
6 9 8 Stob. flor. 120. 7 (iv p. 1080, 15 Hense) 2o(/>o/c\eovs OKOKTTJTOV. 'dW .. .vbo-wv.' The name of the play is omitted by S, and depends on the authority of A, as M leaves out the extract altogether. Xoi
irep tarpos (paveis | dve'iravo'e TOVS e'xovTas.

In Track. 1209 Heracles implores Hyllus to put an end to his sufferings: we Zx°> TratwPiou I Kai

fxovvov

la.T7jpa

TGIV 2/J.GIV

KaK&v. H. refers to Com. fr. adesp. 116 III 429 K. (Plut. mor. I I O E ) elr' el fiiv ijSria-6' b'n TOIOVTOV TOV fiiov, | Sx OVK e'fiiuffe, '£uw dLTjVTtJXV^ev dv, | 6 ddvaros OVK ettKatpos' el 5' rjveyKev hv (so H . for dv) I OVTOS 6 /3ios TI TCSV dvr\Ki<STav, fcrius |

6 ddvaTos avTos o~ov 7^yoi'ej> evvov&Tepos.

Cf. Max. Tyr. 13. 5 'cJ ddvare iraidv *'

el jxkv TavTa X^yeis dWarrb/ievos KaKov ai T^S ei^XTys* et he T)yeZ rw OPTI TOV ddvaTov iraiava elvai Kai iarpos, HXyos d' o65h dirrcrai veKpov, dira\\aKT7]V KaKov Kai aTrXr/aTov Kai voaeEur. Hipp. 1373 Kai fxoi ddvaros iraiav i:\601, Hclid. 595 TO ydp daveiv \ KCLKCOV pov dpe'fj./j.aTos, iyyel KOXUS' ev'xov Kai /cdXet TOV waiava. A parallel Welsh proverb is HeyuTTov (pdp/iaxov vofil'^eTai. (n.). Diphil. quoted by Rhys Roberts in C.Ji. XV 361. fr. 88, 11 570 K . OVK ian. fiios 8s ovxi K^KTijTai Hand-...TovTwv b SAvaros Ka6dSavare

fidvos

irtu&v, fi-q fi' ari/iduris ixoXeiv j

ydp

el
KO.KWV JKaKov, OVK a7ro5^x°M

I04>0KAE0Y2 6gg fiowv oivavXa /cai paKTTjpia 699 699

Musurus: /JI.4\I cod. | SpauXa Bergk: dvavSa cod., dvavSa vulgo the Greeks (Phil, g aypiais | rareix' ^

Hesych. Ill p. 420 pa

KivTpounv avrl TOV rais KI&TTCUS, Sia TO pa.TTeo-$ai (so M . Schmidt for dpaTTeibSii Kai

7rap o-TpaTbrreSov dvtT
va^av). I have no doubt, therefore, that Pouv is a participle, although Hartung, Campbell, and Jebb (on Ai. 976) agree in taking it as the gen. plur. of fiovs.— dopvpihSfj. Nauck seems to be justified in his inference that the words paKrr;p(ois |UXT] dvavXa, unmusical strains, is an oxymoron like KU/XOV avavKbrarov Eur. Kivrpounv came from another play of Phoen. 791 (n.); but fieauXos there has Sophocles. special reference to the flute, whereas ' Uttering harsh and discordant cries.' here its application is generalized, as is Cf. Ai. 976 (TeiKpov) POQVTOS arris TriGf? iwtffKowov jtiAos. The words are exactly sometimes the case with aivavKot and OyuauAos. Cf. Tr. fr. adesp. 93 nt\-q appropriate to describe the shrieks of irapavXa KaKpSTTjra KVfif$a\a. pain with which Philoctetes disturbed

700 SpaKOVTOL 7OO Hesych. I p. 534 SpdKovra • TO Horn. h. Herm. 530) have been held to point to an original use of the staff as a Kijpimov ((cijpfeeioK has been proposed, but there is evidence that Kt)pi}Kiov was divining-rod (Preller-Robert, Gr. Myth. 1 p. 412). The snake was a symbol of an alternative form in late Greek). So0othe underworld: J. E. Harrison, Proleg. J JJ p. 46. It has been assumed that a referThis appears to be the earliest reference ence to Hermes is implied here. But, inin literature to the snake as a constituent emblem of the mjpijKciov (pd^Sos). The asmuch as there is evidence that, at any rate in Hellenistic times, a snake was current representation in art shows two represented as surrounding the staff of snakes facing each other on either side Asclepius (Gruppe, Gr. Myth. p. 1444, of the central stem: see Diet. Ant. 1 322 b. Cf. schol. Thuc. 1. 53 Kiipiiabv Thraemer in Pauly-Wissowa 11 1682), and as Heracles had promised that Asp x p p ireptireir\ey/i{vovs ical avrnrpotrdnrovs irpbsclepius should come to Troy and heal Philoctetes (Phil. 1437), it is tempting dXXijXous Kti/xtvovs. Serv. auct. Aen. 8T 38 caduceum Mercurio idea assignatur, to think of him in this connexion. This quod jide media hostes in amicitiam con- inference is perhaps confirmed by the ducat, quae virga idea serpentibus illigata next fr., in which 'Ep/xaia would be surplusage in the description of a staff actuest. But this form was a later developally carried by Hermes. ment, and the three forks ( i

701 KOX /oa/8Sos &>s

ia

SITTXOC

Bp paKOVTOS

7O1 Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 101, 21 quotes For the KTjpiKeiov see on fr. 700. But Eur. Her. 1274 for antpUpavos iidpa, and that fragment is probably not to be idencontinues: //.(pUpavospd/35os• Zo0otified with this, if for no other reason, KXTJS ^IXOKT^TTIJ• 'Kal...d,fios.' Cf. because Hesych. would not have taken H e s y c h . 1 p . 162 a\iupiicpavov' aiKporiptaSp&Kovra as the lemma in citing the pre6tv ihxpv K«pa\ds, which is supposed to sent passage. be a reference to Eur. I.e.

cMAOKTHTHZ—INEYZ 702 Spvoirayfj CTTOKOV 7 O 2 Hesych. I p . 538 dpvoTrayij oK\7Js&i.\oKT7)Tri. Eustath. Od. p. 1726,on Aesch. I.e. show that such was exactly 16 Kal Spvoirayris (TT6\OS 6 Spiivos wdathe point of view taken by the ancient caXoy Blaydes is sceptical, wishing either to (rvveiTTaAdcu. Hesych. IV p. 81 OT6\OS... read ri\ov, or to correct the explanation Kai 6 TTJs yeios ^/i|3o\os X ^ e r a t , TO eis 6%i) by introducing the ordinary sense of ' a fleet.' This is light-hearted criticism; (FuveffTaXfifroi' {GvveaTpa[iiA£vov cod.: corr.

for the genuineness of our authorities is supported by the obvious resemblance in shape between a wooden peg and the bows of a boat, in which latter sense

Blomfield).

Schol. Ap. Rhod. 1. 1089

airb TTJS TTTV-

703 7 O 3 Hesych. II p . 257 i">7Xw" /j,a.Kapifa. 2o0o^X^s 'i'lAo/CTTfT?; GV Tpola. This is the ordinary gloss: see schol. Ai. 552 Kal vvv ere naKapi^oi on fUKpbs iiy KTe.—fi;XoCi'] fiaKapifew. Schol. Eur. Or. 1673 £"??XQJ] ftaKaplfa. Schol. ib. 521 ovd^
IxaKapifav,

Tpbwov Tiva rb iwaiveiv Kal TO OVK 6KVCI \afi[idi>av TO h-tpov

avrl TOC eripov. The last note is a good example of the narrowness of scholiastic methods. Suid. s.v. fijXcD. /ia/tapifw, quoting Ar. Thesm. 175, Ach. 1008, Eq. 837, Vesp. 1450.

*INEYI A AND B The story of Phineus and his sons, so far as it is given by Sophocles himself in the Antigone (966—987), is as follows. Phineus dwelt at Salmydessus in Thrace, on the west coast of the Euxine, and close to the Bosporus. His first wife was Cleopatra, the daughter of Boreas, but she either died1 or was put away and imprisoned. Phineus married again ; and the 1 Jebb (on v. 966) thinks that the intention of the poet was to compare Antigone with Cleopatra, and that the imprisonment of the latter is implied in 986. The point is doubtful; and the schol. certainly thought otherwise, as appears from his allusion to the death of Cleopatra and from the words T?JS K\eoiraTpas TrcuScts in Ta
312

IO0OKAEOYI

cruel stepmother1 dealt a blinding wound to Cleopatra's two sons, using her shuttle as a dagger to strike them in the eyes. So their high lineage did not avail to save them from a miserable doom. Sophocles does not give the reason of the stepmother's cruelty, but this is supplied by other authorities. It is a story of a wellknown type. The stepmother, whose name is variously recorded, chagrined, we may suppose, at a repulse by one of them, accused her stepsons to their father of attempting to violate her. Phineus believed her accusation, and blinded them, but was himself afflicted with blindness as a punishment either by Zeus, or, according to Apollodorus, by the Argonauts, who were sailing along the coast with Boreas in their company. See Apollod. 3. 200, Hygin. fab. 19, schol. Ov. Id. 265, 2712. Asclepiades3, who gives to the stepmother the name Eurytia, states that Zeus offered to Phineus the alternative of death or blindness. Phineus chose the latter, and the sun-god, incensed in consequence, afflicted him yet further by sending the Harpies to persecute him. We thus pass to the later history of Phineus, which is familiar from the Argonautica of Apollonius (2. 178 ff.). Here the Argonauts appear as the rescuers of Phineus, not, as in Apollodorus, as his punishers. Phineus had been punished with blindness and the unremitting persecution of the Harpies because of an act of impiety: endowed with powers of divination, he had revealed more of the future than was lawful4. He welcomed the Argonauts and promised to show them the means whereby they might pass through the Symplegades, and so reach Colchis, if only they would deliver him from the plague of the Harpies. Accordingly, Calais and Zetes, the sons of Boreas, attacked the Harpies, and drove them away as far as the Strophades islands, where they desisted from the pursuit. Sophocles wrote two plays entitled Phineus ; and, if we turn to the fragments which have been preserved, we find clear traces 1 Her name is not given. Sophocles called her Idothea in the Tympanistae (fr. 645), but Idaea in a play which is not named (fr. 704). Cf. Ov. Rem. Am. 454. 2 The story has been traced back to Hesiod (fr. 54) through Serv. Verg. Am. 3. 209. 3 Schol. Horn, fi 69 (FffG III 302). The schol. Ap. Rh. 2. 178—181 (Etym. gen. ap. Reitzenstein, Ind. led. acad. Rost. 1891/92) makes the alternatives the possession of the art of divination coupled with blindness on the one hand, and a short life in normal condition on the other. On Phineus choosing the former Apollo was incensed and maimed him. This particular version is absurd, since Apollo's action involves no further punishment. Nevertheless something of the kind was related by Hesiod in the Catalogi (fr. 52), which was undoubtedly the ultimate literary source bearing on the connexion of Phineus with the Argonauts (Sittig in PaulyWissowa VII 2424). 4 Hes. fr. 151 made his crime consist in showing the way to Phrixus; and there are other variants.

INEYI

313

of the later history of Phineus in frs. 709, 713 and 714, which seem to refer to the attacks of the Harpies, and in fr. 712, which describes the emaciated condition of Phineus himself. On the other hand, frs. 715 and 710 undoubtedly refer to the blinding of the Phineidae. Fr. 710, which testifies to the cure of the two sons by Asclepius, is corroborated by the parallel statement of Phylarchus (fr. 17, FHG I 338)1, who adds that it was his intention to gratify Cleopatra. From A.P. 3. 4 it appears that, according to one version of the story, the Phineidae ultimately put their stepmother to death, in order to avenge their mother's wrongs, and that Cleopatra survived, and was present to rejoice in the act of justice2. Diodorus (4. 43, 44), in a rationalized narrative, confirms the final victory of Cleopatra and her sons, whom he supposes to have been rescued by the Argonauts. We are justified in concluding from these facts that the two plays of Sophocles were concerned with the history of Idaea's cruelty and the punishment of Phineus respectively; and that the first play ended with the rescue of the Phineidae and the execution of their vengeance, and the second with the release of Phineus from the Harpies. To speculate further on the details, as for example whether Cleopatra shared in her sons' triumph, seems unprofitable. Welcker3 treated the account of Asclepiades4 as furnishing the basis of the plot, and held that the Phineus was produced in a revised edition, which he identified with the Tympanistae. His theory was approved by Dindorf, but may now be regarded as obsolete, in so far as it limits the activity of Sophocles to the composition and revision of a single play. G. Wolff in Philol. XXVIII 343 f. identified the Tympanistae with the earlier Phineus, the plot of which was to be found in schol. Ant. 980 and schol. Ap. Rhod. 2. 178. He avoided the difficulty arising from the name Idothea, which is said to have been given to the stepmother in the Tympanistae, by supposing that in fr. 645 the words Kara 8e nva<;. ..d8e\r/v are parenthetic, and that ^9 refers to Idaea. But the natural interpretation of the scholium rather points to a contrast between xal avrbs %oorc\rj<; and Kara rivas.

I think, however, that Wolff was right in refusing to attach much 1 Bakhuyzen, de farodia, p. 185, wrongly refers this to the healing of Phineus, notwithstanding the evidence of Phylarchus.

- fi.-qTpvt.av KXiinos Kal K\VT6VOOS noXu/a?)5i)S [ KTCIVOVGI. ^pvylyv, /xarpus vwip
Sanvaiitv-qv bulat. Idaea is called a Phrygian, as the daughter of Dardanus. Her barbarian origin explains her cruelty: Diodorus makes her a Scythian, just as Sophocles made Idothea a Phoenician (fr. 645). 3 p. 329 ff. 4 Jessen rightly regards it as a conflation: it is now established that Asclepiades did not preserve the plots of single plays. See Pauly-Wissowa 11 1628.

314

I04>0KAE0YZ

importance to the disagreement of the schol. Ap. Rhod. 2. 178, to which may now be added Etym. gen. cod. Vat. (fr. 705), with fr. 645 as well as with Soph. Ant. 973, in respect to the statement that the blinding of his sons was the act of Phineus himself. For by giving credit to the slander of his wife, and delivering his sons into her power, Phineus made himself responsible for her cruelty. Wolff's view of the second Phineus was the same as that which has been taken above1, and he made a good point in suggesting that Sophocles may have found occasion to exhibit the chastening effect of suffering upon the character of Phineus, just as Oedipus changes in the interval between the two plays which bear his name. Jessen2 held that in the first Phineus Phineus himself blinded his sons at the instigation of Idaea, and that their sight was subsequently restored by Asclepius. On the other hand, he believes that the Tympcmistae was a distinct play, though dealing with the same material. Here Idothea blinded her stepsons with /eep/a'Se?, and threw them into a dungeon, after Cleopatra's death. The sequel related the punishment of Phineus by the Argonauts, to whom the mention of Colchis in fr. 638 points. Boreas was with them, and was the speaker of fr. 6$y. Jessen's view is deserving of approval in so far as it is the only one which does not go beyond or strain the evidence; but the result—a double treatment of the same story in different plays3—does not commend itself as probable. It must be admitted that, with the evidence at our disposal,.the problem of the Tympanistae is insoluble. Aeschylus wrote a Phineus, produced with the Persae in 472 B.C., which is known to have referred to the Harpies (TGF p. 83). Aesch. Eum. 50 also shows that the Harpies were represented in contemporary art4. Aristotle has a mysterious allusion to an otherwise unknown play entitled <&tvel8ai: poet. 16. 145 S a

I O Kal

V {,<*-vayvd)picn<s) iv rot? QivelSaK,

TOP TOTTOV avveXoyiaavTO

rrjv el/J.apfj,evr)v OTI iv

aTToOavelv avTais, ical yap i^eTedr)aav evravOa.

IZovcrau yap

TOVTW

eifiapTO

There is nothing

in the extant versions of the legend of Phineus which helps to 1 So also Ribbeck, p. 540, and Jessen in Roscher III 2361, so that this result appears to be well settled. The original form of the story, in which Phineus was punished for disobedience to the gods, was entirely distinct from that of his treatment of his sons. This is shown by the conflicting roles of the Argonauts. 2 Roscher III 2362. 3 It will be observed that the effect is much the same as that of Welcker's revised edition. Hiller v. Gaertingen, p. 59 ff., had taken a similar view, holding that Apollodorus reproduced the substance of the first Phineus, and that in the Tympanistae Idothea blinded and imprisoned the Phineidae. 4 For the extant archaeological evidence see Gruppe, p. 5705; Frazir, Pausan. i n p. 612.

0INEYI explain this. Nor can anything be made of the fragments attributed to the Phinidae of Accius. However, it is clear that the blinding of the Phineidae was a favourite incident of the tragic stage. Thus Timocles in the &iowo-id£ovhov<; irpu>Tov, el /3ovXet,

aicoTrei | &>v d)e\ovcn iravras•.

.6(j>6a\/j,t,a

Tt?

704 [iirrjpaidr) ras ctyeis 6

OTL TOWS CK KXeoTrdrpas

8 7O4

Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 2. 178

jprj di T&S 6^ei? 6 ^ivefis Kara fiev ivlovs biro TOU 'HXI'OU, 5ca rb iro\vv xpt>vov alrijaai /x3X\oi> £T)V r\ pXiireiv • Kara 5£ ivlovs, OTL ^7re/3oi)\ei»(7e UepGei. ~otpoK\rjs 54, on TOIIS CK K\eo7raT/)as vlois iriijAwaev 'OapOov (Napdtvtov H . Keil from schol. on v. 140) KO.1 Kpa/i^ov (K&pa/tfiw _Holstenius) TreiaBeis 5ta{$o\cus 'ISatas TTJS O.VTS>V fir)Tpvias.

If we may press these words to their full extent, Sophocles is made to represent the blinding of Phineus as a punish-

vlovs

'iSaias.J

ment for his own act in blinding his sons at the instigation of Idaea. See Introductory Note. The names of the sons are elsewhere given as Plexippus and Pandion (Apollod. 3. 200, schol. Soph. Ant. 981), Terymbas and Aspondus (schol. Soph. Ant. 981), Crambus and Parthenius (schol. Apoll. Rhod. 2. 140), Bithynus and Mariandynus {Etym. gen.: cf. FHG III 594), and Polidector and Polidophus (schol. Ov. Ib. 271). Welcker and Bergk substituted Oreithyius for Oarthus here.

705 [iirrjpcodij 6 <E>t^eus o n ra iSta reKva 7O5 Etym. gen. cod. Vat. (Reitzenstein, Ind. led. acad. Rost. a. 1891/92 p. 15) 2o0o/cX^s Si iv Qivei ($ii/ei5ais corr. Reitzenstein) TnjpuBTJvai avrbv ^W1" (air6v (pacrw cod.) 6'ri r a I'dia riKva. avei-

There is no other evidence of a form of the story in which Phineus killed his sons; and since in the Phineus the sons

recovered their sight (fr. 710), Reitzenstein substituted $we(5ais (Arist. poet. 16. 1455" 10) for <E>iKe?. But there is nothing to connect Sophocles with that title; and the text is probably a loosely abbreviated statement to the effect that Phineus was punished for the blinding of his sons; or, in other words, it is an echo of fr. 704.

706 yepcriv apirdyois 706

Schol. Horn. H 76 (Oxyrhynch.

Pap.vm p . 105,35) rb apTrayos, 'ivdev eJrXijOvvev AiVxiJ^os iv Qivel apirayoi xeP0^vi Kal 2O0OKX^S iv $ivet a xePaLV apwdyois.

This quotation, illustrating the use of l s , is taken from a long note on

/xdprvpos treated as typical of a certain class of Trapwvvfia, i.e. those which convert an original genitive into a new nominative. The irapibwua themselves are one of the seven classes into which Dionysius Thrax (§ 14) divided derivative {irapayto-

Z00KAE0Y2 7a) (irpuTdrvira) nouns, and are so called as having no common characteristic (unlike iraTpiovv/uKd, tcrr/rucd etc.) other than

the fact of their derivation from a nounstem (Bekk. anecd. p. 858, o.ff.)- For the transference of other stems into the 0- declension, which is a common feature of most Indo-European languages, see Brugmann, Comp. Gr. II p. n o E. tr. The word apTayos had hitherto been known only from schol. Dorv. Ar. Plut. 800 and Arcad. p. 102, 9.

The reference both in Aesch. and Soph, must surely be to the Harpies: cf. Apoll.

R h o d . 2. 188 "ApTrviat arbinaTos x«/><3>/ T ' diri yaiujytjKTJtru) \ vvvexius rf/jirafox. It

should be remembered that the most ancient archaeological evidence represents the Harpies not as birds, but as winged women: see Gruppe, p. 8470, and Sittig in Pauly-Wissowa v n 2422. Even Vergil, who definitely describes them as volucres,

speaks oiuncae manus (Aen. 3. 217).

707 ovB' av 70 Hocnropeiov iv 7O7

Steph. Byz. p. 179, 7 Bdffiropos

...rb edviKov Boair6pios...'SoipoK\rjs 8' iv Qivei irp&Tif Sib. 8i (tajpiov c o d . : corr. Gave-

lius) 'oiS' hv..,i)Sup.' The quotation without the name of the play appears also in Etym. M. cod. Voss. p. 590 E Gaisf.

vSwp

For the form cf. 'E0e
708 rpvnava 708

Hesych. 1 p. 342

rp&irava • ra Qptiyia. irvpeia. $LV€? deuripifi (T]vei (3ai cod.).

p

has not been explained, but Bergk's conjecture (j>piyava would be a change for the worse. It is possible that the word points to some ceremonial lighting of a sacred fire not otherwise recorded, just as the fire of the Vestal Virgins was rekindled every year on the 1st March by the same primitive method: see Warde Fowler, Roman Festivals, p. 1475. The allusion is to the ' fire-drill,' to adopt the name chosen by Tylor to describe the contrivance whereby a stick roughly pointed is twirled between the hands in a hole scooped in a flat piece of soft wood, till fire is produced.—irupcta is the general name given to the implements required, which are distinguished as TpvTavov and GTopeis (or iffxapd). Cf. Apoll. Rhod. 1. 1184 TOI 8' a/A<j>i vvpi^a

SiveieiTKov, where the schol. gives the best existing account of the process. The invention of it was ascribed to Hermes: Horn. h. Herm. 109—in. Cf. Phil. 296. Since the ordinary rpiiravov was fashioned of metal, we should recognize here an instance of oxymoron parallel to Aesch. Cho. 493 widens 5' Ct%aX/ceiirots iffripiOBiis, w&Ttp—Agamemnon entrapped by Clytaemnestra. Eur. fr. 595 alSovs ixaXKetiroiaiv

ZpevKTcu n-i-Sais.

To

the

same class belong Eur. Or. 621 ?ws v<j>r\^e Sd/j,' &vi](pat
referring to this form of qualified metaphor (vpoirayopeOaavTa rb aXktrrpKov airo<j>ij
ginary example the description of a shield

INEYI

317

709 7O9

Hesych. I p. 293 dp

irpos TTJV dvffiav cuTpeirt^ofi^vots. £o
Schow for the cod. iifiei). See on ft. 675. There seems no ground for suspicion, but Blaydes conjectures apyfiaai in the sense of naTdpyfuun. It"

is suggested that the context contained a description of the preparations for a sacrificial feast, which was interrupted by the appearance of the Harpies: Apoll. Rhod. 2. 18401)5^7aj'wrt9
710 avrl yap Tv<j>\ov xal keXd/ATrpvvTcu /co'pas, iraicjvos ev/j-evovs rvyatv. not, are necessary for the completion of the period. Unfortunately, the whole context in Aristophanes is paratragoedic, so that we are deprived of the usual insays : avrl rod ci/n.eveTas diroKarais not sufficient to determine exactly the (Trrj&ai, %apt^6/xeyop aur&v rfj lAyrpi K\eolimits of the quotation (or parody). TrdTpq. TT) 'EpexSews (BvyaTpiS-fj add. SternHence I have added the words OVTI yap bach, unless TTJ airb is read). See also Tv
'O,VTI...TVX&V.'

Schol. rec. on v. 635 (i.e. as reported originally in the Aldine ed.) says: CK $u>lvs So0o/cX^ous 6 (Tripos. Schol. V on v. 636

IOOKAEOYI

3X8

1 dvTl...Tv^\ov, if from Sophocles, would be parallel to O.T. 454 TvtpXbs yap &K BeSopKbros | Kal TTTWXOS dvTl vXovalov, Ai. 1020 SouXos Xbyounv APT' 4Xev64pou (pavds. 2 !||ijidTuTai: so metaphorically in Aesch. Prom. 514
OPT1

iirdpyefia

(where it should be observed that e'lrdp7e/ios is a medical term : see fr. 233). Philo I p. 455 M. teal TO dpaxirarov dpeTrj;...Ta T£WS ne/j-VKbra Kal TV
/i&Toxre. But a difficulty is imported from E u r . fr. 541 7}fie1s Se TloXvftov irdld' 4peiaavTes ir4S<ji | ^o/t/iOToO/iec Kal StbXXv/jiep Kbpas, where 4%0/ipui.ToSp = to deprive of

right. Hence several critics, from Byzantine times onwards (see scholl.), have supposed that Aristophanes intended to direct attention to a ridiculous ambiguity of language, holding that XeXd/iirpvprai also covered a reference to the disease XetiKoi/xa. This is quite unjustifiable; for t h e usage of eKj3popTap, tKKfipiaaeiv, 4K/xoxdeip, i^afjuXXaadaL, i^avdeiv, 4£e//.Tredovv, 5 i ^ l i % l

££vypaipetp (although it is not intended to suggest that they all stand on the same footing) shows that there was a tendency for verbs compounded with 4K to develope a particular sense denoting expulsion by the side of their ordinary meaning in which the preposition bears a slightly intensive force.—X«Xd|xirpDi'TOi: cf. Aesch. Eum. 104 eOdovffa yap tppty 6fi/xatTLP Xafnr pvverai. 3 ircuwvos. Traiiif, as well as Traiav and Trajan, is one of the regular (irLKXij
711 dvrjXCov 711

7'] 5' A | &VT)Xlov iriiXat. Crusius: KainfXdov Bvpai Pollux

then be that Hades is a warder who never lets his prisoners escape : Theogn. 709 Kvavias re iriXas Trapa/telif/eTai, aire davbvTuv \ ^pvxas elpyovtnv Kalvrep dvawoItAvas, Prop. 4. 11. 2 panditur ad nullas 493, in 500 K.). ianua nigra preces ; \ cum semel infernas Several critics have perceived that intrarttnt ftuiera leges; | non exorato stant KairrfkeLov dvpai was substituted by the adamante viae. Hence the entrance is parodist for the actual words of Sophofirmly secured ([Plat.] Axioch. 371 B TO cles, and that the general sense of the 5e irpbirvXa Trjs els II\oi/rwvos bSov o~tdijoriginal was ' his eyes are closed as fast pots KXeidpois Kal KXeialv S rd Xpwu&ojv. /j.adrf/j.aTa KairriXeiovTas Kal rds p& ws iravdoxdov Oupas .avolyovTas iravTl The point of the comparison would 711 Pollux 7. 193 TO $t TGIV KaicijXuv ipyaaTTjpwv KairrjXeiov dp-qKaaiv ol /cw/iy5o5i5dff/ca\oi, Kal TO Kio/j.ipdoufxevoi' ep 2o0o/c\eous $i!/et' ' (HXicpapa KiKX-QTal y tl)s Ka.irr}Xelov 86pai' (Com. fr. adesp.

cMNEYI Trpcxriovn TWV av8pdiwwv. But the humour of the parody depended chiefly on the similarity of sound, and Sophocles can hardly have written u>s iroXtffevoi r6\ai after the pattern of O.C. 1570. The

319

parodist ludicrously substituted an open for a shut door, although of course a belated guest might arrive to find the tavern closed : Ar. Lys. 426 irot 5' ad iroi&v dXX' fj Kairrjkuov OKOTT&V ;

712 elcropav 712

post veicpbs interpunxerunt Jacobs, Dobree

7 1 2 Athen. 119 c (on the word rapixcjaAdd Aesch. Cho. 295 Kct/ci5s Tapixos) 2o0o/c\?js T' iv Qivti' 'venp6s... rapi.xev8ivTa Tra/jupSdprip fiopip.—The reAlyvirTios.' ference to the Egyptian mummies was It may be inferred with a high degree no doubt prompted by a recollection of of probability that these words are a Herod. 2. 86—90, and may therefore be description of Phineus, as he appeared added to the list of cases where Sophoto the Argonauts, in the state of emacles can be shown to have been influenced ciation to which he was reduced by the by Herodotus: see on fr. 29. Moreover, persecutions of the Harpies : cf. Apoll. Herodotus uses the word Tc£pi)(os of a Rhod. 2. 197 opdwdels d' eifvrjdev, aK-qpiov corpse: 9. 120 (Protesilaus) Kal reBveths •qir' HvcLpov, | fia.KTpt£ aKyjTTTdfii,evos piKvois Kal rapi^us iuv. Add Aelian nat. anim. iroalv 7}G 80pafe \...iriv(p 84 oi av(Tra\4os 13. 21 \4yei A77fioaTparos iv Tavdypa Xp&s I ed/cXij/cei, pivol 5e trvv dtrrea [/.OVPOV dedaaadai rdpixov Tpirw^a, Tzetz. Chil. iepyov. The credit of having first perII 33 (of Cleopatra's corpse) KOX irpbs ceived this belongs to F . Jacobs {Addit. TTJI' 'Pii/i^y ra/uxos irWXXeTai x^Piv ^™^ Animadv. in Athen. p. 83), who also (Benndorf in Festschrift Th. Gomperz, quotes for the metaphor Sophron fr. 54 K. p. 405). TO yap direxdbpLtvov yijpas a/xe fj.apaivov

713 anevwTLcrav 7 1 3 Hesych. I p. 233 airevuiTiffav' aireaTpeifiai' rh, vdra. Xo/poK\i]s Qivel itbiy" cod ) L. and S.' wrongly quote this fragment as an instance of the transitive usage (=fugare). But the gloss of Hesych. clearly indicates terga vertere as the meaning : so the simple verb in O. T.

193 ("A/)ea) ira\icr6faipovTo \ rV\e irapi£.

714 KaTappOLKTCU 7 1 4 Hesych. II p. 432 KarapaKTiji• OXZTOS, ptial;. Kal 6 der6s. Xo<poK\rjs AaoK6ui>Ti (fr. 377). Kal rapirvtas ev <&iv-q. The last words were corrected by Musurus to /cat rat aprvias iv Qtvct. Bakhuyzen with less probability suggested Kal 7] apirvia At&xfaos <&i.veT.

For the word KarappttKi-ns see on fr. 377. Its suitability as applied to the Harpies may be judged from Apoll. Rhod. 2. 187 aXXd 81a veipeav d
IO4X3KAEOYZ

320

715 7 1 5 Hesych. II p. 477 Kr/piofia (KTI- and the subject was a favourite (Timocles piu/ia Salmasius)" o/Ji,t\rifia (ij XIJA"/ conj. fr. 6, 13 II 453 K.). If the view taken Dindorf). &m yap TO Kiiplov, 1} (Sv cod.) in the Introductory Note is right, it be\ i S Q S longs to Qiveis a.—The rheum which i 6 0pp pfa has gathered in the empty eye-sockets is Nauck includes the fr. here, accepting compared to honey in the cell of the the view of Perger and Dobree. I have honeycomb. M. Schmidt would have followed him with hesitation; for there was a well-known <&iveiSai of uncertain preferred K^pw/m' tr/iy/to, but Ktiplov is against this. authorship (Arist. poet. 16. 14550 10),

716 7 1 6 Eustath. Od. p. 1496, 53 (Ael. 5^ <priet. Phot. lex. p. 248, 18 /idaraxas' viation; for in Nicander also judoraf is Ta? aKpLSas. XotpoicXijs. a locust (ijyovv dxplSi rfj aiToipayip Sfioia For further evidence of this meaning Kre. schol.). ^The comparison of the see Etym. M. p. 216, 9 /ndcrral KaXetrat, Harpies to locusts is apt (Sittig in Pauly7rapa T6 itaaavtiai' NlnavSpos (Ther. 802) Wissowa VII 2427). fib ivdXlyKios. K\ehapxos d

717 6fiav\ov 7 1 7 Cyrill. cod. Messan. (ReitzenFor the word cf. fr. 24, 5 and Hesych. stein, Ind. led. acad. Kost. a. r 890/91 there quoted. Phot. lex. p. 331, 5 67«ii>\ov bi*bicoiTov. p. 5) 8fiav\ov 0iJ.bK01.T0v, atiyicoiTOv, dfiov

fiXfy 2 0 X }

Qi

The play which Euripides composed under this title was widely known, and is the subject of a familiar allusion in Ar. Ach. 421 : it must, therefore, have been produced before 425 B.C. It is definitely ascertained that the subject is outlined in Apollod. 3. 1 7 5 Qolvi%

b 'A/U.UI/TO/3O5...V7TO TOV 7raTpO9 eTV\a>6r} / c a r a -

yjrevaafiivT)<;
E c h o e s of t h e E u r i p i d e a n

INEYI—*OINII

321

story appear in A.P. 3. 3 'AX/ci^eSr) £vv6/j.evvov 'Xfivvropa ipv/cei, I 4>otV(K0f 8' i6e\et, iravaai j(p\ov yeverov /celvos S' av 80X1019 •tyiQvploiLaaiv rf)(deTO Kovpq), rpye 8' is 60a\/AOvs Xa/MirdBa 7rai&o\eTii>, and in Prop. 2. I. 60 Phoenicis Chiron lumina

Phillyrides (sc. sanavif). We have already seen1 that Welcker postulated an entirely different argument for the Sophoclean Phoenix, and have given reasons for rejecting his theory2. It is in any case more probable that Sophocles—whether he preceded or followed Euripides—in selecting Phoenix for the title-role of a play, was occupied rather with the pathetic history recounted in the ninth book of the Iliad, than with an entirely subordinate incident in his later life. Moreover, fr. 720 is naturally interpreted as a reference to Phthia. The story as related by Homer comprised -certain primitive elements which Euripides avoided (schol. A Horn. I 453 ava/j,dpzr]Tov eladyei rbv r/pwa iv

TU> QO'IVIKI)

; but it

would be rash to infer from rot? Tpayucoi? in schol. A Horn. I 448 that Sophocles and Euripides were agreed. Nor can we lay stress on the plural in. Suid. s.v. iirriXvyd^ovTai- 01 §' ovv Trepl ifKeicTTOv Ti6e/J.evoi TCL TOV (POLVIKOS, Ka\\vvovTe<; (fiaal TOVTO lyeveaOai.

Epict. diss. 1. 28. 32 probably refers to the Phoenix of Euripides; but if wider scope were allowed to the mention of the tragic hero as the victim of a false judgement, the allusion would be consistent with the view which has been advocated above. 718

Kvva.po% axavda iravra. TrXrjdvei yvrjv 7 1 8 Athen. 70 A Kivdpa. ravrrjv So- TTJV TT6\LV. We have no better authority (J)OK\TJS €V KoXxtffi (fr. 348) Kvvdpav /caXet, to lollow for the meaning. Athenaeus iv 5e QoiviKi ' KVPapos...yir)v.' Eustath. states that in his time Kivdpa rathei than Od. p. 1822, 17 a,irb KVVOS Aeyerai aveTf.- Kuvdpa was the current form (71 A), and deiadanrapaHotpoKXei tcaii]Kijva.pos dtcapda, Galen de aim. facitlt. 2. 51 treats the 17 Kai Kvvapa, spelling Kvvdpa as an affectation (tpevyovres Later on (70 c) Athenaeus introduces TO
See Introductory Note to the Dolopes, I p. 119. Wagner, Epil. Vat. p. 224, also differs from Welcker as to the subject of the Phoenix. 2

P. II.

21

322 (fr. 92 Preller) are quoted by Athenaeus as employing &na.v6a Kvvapa. ir\r|0vei,. Dindorf in his Lex. Soph. conjectured irXr/Biivei in accordance with the view that ifhriOvvu is the transitive form of irXyBtiia. But in his edition he made no sign, and the lexicons strangely quote this fragment as an example of v\i)6iw used intransitively. It is still open to question whether a valid distinc-

tion can be drawn between irXijOiiw and ir\r)8ipei in this respect; see the edd. on Aesch. Suppl. 612. In Hdt. 2. 93 most critics keep the reading of the MSS : tireav Si irX^BieaBai. ftpxyrai 6 N«\os. TvXi\6ivw and TTXTIBVW are often confused : Jebb on O.C. 377 (cr. n.), Theophr. c. pi. 1. 19. 5, Plut. mor. 1005 F. So iBtivovras (intrans.) was corrected in Ap. Rhod. 1. 323.

719 VTrdcrracrts 719

Socrates hist. eccl. 3. 7 p. 176 B

ioi 6 ypafj^fiartKos cv Tt$ Kara
McvafSpifi (fr. 462, 10, i n 132 K.) ra KapevKeti/xaTa. This is copied by Jul. Poll. hist. phys. p. 376. For Julios Polydeukes, a late Byzantine chronicler, see Krumbacher, Geschichte d. Byz. Litteratur, p. 135. Irenaeus, the pupil of Heliodorus, was a grammarian who be-

longed to the latter part of the first century A.D. He was the earliest of the Atticists, and is frequently referred to as 6 'ATTIKKTTTIS. Hence the error in Socrates' quotation, which appears to be drawn from the book irepl a.TTiia
Pauly-Wissowa v 2122. Irenaeus declared that iiroorao-is in the philosophical sense was unknown to Attic writers. No other instance of vwdtrraffis as ' ambush' is quoted ; but we may compare Eur. Andr. 1114 T$ Se Zupripijs dp' itpeuTT'qKei \<Sxos ! $6
720

72O Eustath. //. p. 1088, 35 (poppas fr. 122 <popfia\5b3v Kopav dyi\av ixaTbyyWTi, irapa So0OK\e?, ao~ivt iv QOIVIKL T] yvLov. So we should explain Theogn. IV ToWofc TrpoaofiiKouo'a. Tpo<pr}s X&P '• T h e 861 ff. o'i /ie rf>l\oL irpoSiSovo-L, Kal oix source of Eustathius was Suetonius irepi i8i\ovo~l Tt dovvai I dvSpwv tpaivof/.ivwv • p\ao-(prjfj,Luv: see Miller, Milanges, p. 414, d W iyii airofidrtj \ eo-ireplv T' t£ei/u Kal and Cohn in Pauly-Wissowa vi 1477. dpBp'n) aSrts l
Anthal. Lyr. p. xxxi.

Pollux 7. 203

Kal <popj3a5as S' hv TCIS irbpvas

\iyois.

The story of Phrixus has already been discussed in connexion with the Athamas (1 p. 1), and any attempt to reconstruct the plot of the Phrixus must take into account the results of that investigation. The internal evidence is insignificant, and general probability can alone decide the issue. Urlichs conjectured that

0Z

323

the Phrixus related to the fortunes of the hero subsequent to his arrival in Colchis. But Welcker's reply (p. 317) is conclusive, that the tradition records no adventure of Phrixus in that country which could have formed the plot of a tragedy. Welcker himself found the substance of the plot in Hyg'm.poet. astron. 2. 20 Crethea autem habuisse Demodicen uxorem, quant alii Biadicen dixerunt ...hanc autem Phrixi, Athamantis filii, corpore inductam in amorem incidisse: neque ab eo, ut sibi copiam faceret, impetrare potuisse: itaque necessario coactain criminari eum ad Crethea coepisse, quod diceret, ab eo vim sibi paene adlatam, et horuni similia mulierum consuetudine dixisse. quo facto Crethea, ut uxoris amantem et regem decebat, permolum ut de eo suppliciuni sunuret persuasisse. Nub em autem. intervenisse et ereptum Phrixum.. .ipsuni autem {i.e. Phrixus, after dedicating the fleece of the ram at Colchis) a Mercurio ad Athamantem esse reductum qui patri eius satisfecerit eum innocentia confisum profugisse. Another version made Demodice the step-mother of Phrixus, and this, as I have endeavoured to show in Class. Rev. XXIII 255, is referred to by Pind. Pyth. 4. 161 Bip\xa re xpiov ftaOvfiaXKov dyeiv, | rat TTOT' ex TTQVTOV aaa)8r)

etc re fj.aTpvca<; dBecov

ftekewv. The scholiast on Pindar comments as follows : e/ca/cwdr; yap Bia rr/v fir)rpvt,av epaaOeicrav avrov Kal iire^ovXeuffr]. TavTrjv Be 6 fjiev HipBapos iv II/AVOW AijfioBiKTjv, c l7nrta.? Be TopyaJTuv So^io/cX^? Be iv 'AOdfiavTt, Ne(f>e\ijp- <£>epeKvB7}<; ©e/ucrTai. U n -

fortunately, the scholiast, so far from elucidating the problem, adds to the confusion by his statement that Sophocles in the Athamas called the step-mother Nephele. This can hardly be anything but a blunder, and was perhaps abbreviated from a statement which made the union with Nephele subsequent to the marriage with Ino. Such was in fact the account given by Philostephanus (fr. 37, FHG III 34), who related that Nephele left her husband, finding that he was still intriguing with Ino, and that Ino was then restored to her former position. Escher (in Pauly-Wissowa II 1931) preferred to explain that Nephele's name is given as that of the prime contriver of the mischief, i.e. of the sacrifice of Athamas. However that may be, the statement of the scholiast does not in any way assist the conclusion that the Demodice-story was the central incident in the Phrixus. Welcker's conjecture is thus little more than a guess, but he is justified in remarking (p. 319) that Phrixus was probably the leading character in the play which bears his name, and that the proposed plot agrees well enough with that assumption. There is however another possible solution which must not be overlooked, v\z. that the Phrixus contained the earlier part of the story of I no's plot up to the time of the 21—2

IO0OKAEOYZ

324

escape of the two children, whereas the Atkatnas, as has already been suggested (i p. 2), narrated the subsequent punishment of their father. On the other hand, Ahrens thought that the Phrixus contained the concluding part of the story given by Hyginus, that is to say, the return of Phrixus to his native land and the establishment of his innocence. Ribbeck {Rom. Trag. p. 526), who wrongly concludes that the story of Demodice was a late copy of that of Phaedra and Hippolytus, and cannot therefore be attributed to Sophocles, is driven to suggest that the Phrixus was a satyr-play. 721 opia KeXevdov TTJaSe yrj<s irpoao-Tias 721

Steph. Byz. p. 140, 1 ficrTi>...

hardly warranted in suspecting a corrup-

tion of the text. At the same time, it wpodarios. OBTOI yhp KOX TO 6TI\VK6V evplGKeTai, Trpoaffrta yij, iv <&pli;c>) 2otpoK\4ovs must be admitted that it is not easy to ' opia.. .TrpoaoTtas.' The words as quoted are unintelligible. Ellendt's attempt to join opia KEX.EV8OI> (as if recta viae), making yijs depend on the combined notion, with the sense 'via recte ducens per regiones urbi finitimas' cannot be approved ; for the sense given to Spia is improbable, and tragic usage requires that it should be joined to 777s (Eur. Her. 82, Tro. 375). Hartung conjectured T' iXeiurj for Kekeiidou, but we are

frame a context which will quite satisfactorily account for KeXeiOov. For the completion of the sense something like did. ftatcpas 7repw seems to be demanded. But in that case, unless there is a lacuna in the quotation [e.g. bpta KCX&J&OV < Sid. fianpas dtpiy/ievos \ vdpeifj.1 'Axa.iu>v>TT]
5e KT£.), we should be obliged to assume a hyperbaton: see on Eur. Hel. 719, Hclid. 160, Phoen. 1318.

722 KW7)8bv 7 2 2 Etym. Gud. p. 330, 43 KVV&... howling for his master (Ael. nat. an. 1. i£ ov KOITO KPvtfi6n6s...Kal irdXiv XoOK\ijs 8), and Hdt. 1. 1 uses Kcuf^/iara for the <£p(£<j> (so cod. Paris, in Anecd. Paris. IV inarticulate cries of babies. It does not p. 73, 32 : }S. KWIJby Blaydes to iairdpa.%1 viv. (2) Blom- S6P- US K6UV, the name 2O0OK\T1S should field, i^Kpa^av u>s nvvfaiAevoi. (3) Tucker's be transposed so as to follow K6I>IV: but e£^7rpa£d viv, ' I finished him off' (C.R. see on fr. 127.—KVV£OV|J.EVOV. Kvufdoficu, XVII 191), was anticipated by Papabasiwhich also occurs, is more in accordance leios. (4) Wagner, efiipajd viv. Of these with analogy (cf. fiXTjx&optu, /i^/tdo/tai, Blomfield's has met with most favour. ppvx&o/Mii, etc.); but Kvv^ioiiai is supJ. remarks that iKKpdfa denotes a sound ported by the best MSS in O.C. 1571 and very different from Kvv%eitx6ai; but KVV- Ar. Vesp. 977. (J.) Wilamowitz, Textiy]8fi6s was used of a dog squealing from geschichte d. Bukoliker, p. 20, rejects KVVpain {r) TQV KVVWV v\aK7j bSvpriKi} Suid., feic70ai in Theocritus. who has also Kvv^ojievov arevovTa), or

325

723

723

Antiatt. (Bekk. anecd.) p. 83, 23

cujjeXrjs. Dindorf in Thes. 2625 C says of this word: ' Frequentant recentiores vocabulum a prosa Atticorum, ut videtur, alienum.' The fact was observed by the Atticists of the second century A.D., and it maybe assumed that the Antiattichl maintained by his reference to Sophocles that the word was current in Attic. One would suppose that it was employed in the sense which it usually bears in later Greek, that of simple, artless, naif; for, though no early instance of this meaning

is quoted, it seems to be implied by the stylistic use, which appears in Aristotle y p b l atpiXeia (((rhet. 3. 3 9. 9 I4oo 4 b 18)) S p So also of artistic i i handiwork h d i k in Antiph. h fr. f 163, 6 n 77 K. It is remarkable that the earliest example Theogn. 1211 fir) /j.' a
^ews. For ancient criticism on the word see the schol. on hx.Eq. 527, from which Suidas made extracts.

Welcker1 had no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the Phryges of Sophocles was to be compared with the ^pvye? f) "EtcTopos Xvrpa of Aeschylus, and that the subject of both plays was the visit made by Priam to the tent of Achilles in order to ransom the body of Hector, which is described in the last book of the Iliad. He was to some extent influenced by schol. Aesch. Prom. 452 cntoTTwai yap Trapa T045 irooTjTat'i TO. Trpoawira f} Bi avdaheuap, cos ' A^tAAevpu!;l ^ocpo/cXeov;: but the state-

ment in the Life of Aeschylus (p. 3, 11=467, 25 W.), together with Ar. Ran. 911 and the schol., prove that Menage was right in regarding the mention of Sophocles as an error. When the evidence for Sophocles' play consisted of2 a single quotation, there was some reason for Bergk's opinion that the title should be eliminated altogether; and Wecklein3 also conjectured that fr. 724 ought to be assigned to Aeschylus. But the recent discovery of a new fragment (725) alters the conditions of the problem, although it is far from certain that the plot of Sophocles' play was the same as that of its Aeschylean namesake4. 1

p-135Rh. Mus. xxxv 254: his purpose was to show that Sophocles and Euripides deliberately avoided the subjects contained in the Iliad. 3 Sitzungsb. k. b. Akad. 1891, p. 363. 4 See p. 192. For the views of Blass and Reitzenstein see below. It has also been suggested that the titles $piyes and Upiafios should be identified: see p. 160. 2

326 Welcker and Hermann held that the Hectoris Lutra of Ennius was adapted, not from Aeschylus but from the Phryges of Sophocles; but it is extremely unlikely that in the case supposed Ennius would have altered the title1. 724 S evyeveis yap Kayadovs, c5 TTCU, evyovT€<; a/ras

e/cros elo~i rStv

v

TlliV

Apr)<s yap

KCLKGJV

KaKO)U

724. 2 ivalpetv B (cod. Paris. 198^) m. s e c : SMA 4 oiSha schol. / / . I XwrifeTOi C. Keil et Conington : Xoylfcrat Stob., XT/fferai schol. //. 7 2 4 Stob. flor. 8. 5 (ill p . 341, 10 Hense) 2OOKWOUS $pvywv 'robs evyevets...\oyliberal.' v. 4 is quoted without name of poet or play by schol. Horn. B 833The general sentiment, summed up in the last line belongs to proverbial philosophy: Anacreon fr. 101 Kaprcpbs yv TTOXl/uots Tiju6«-pi7-os, oB rbde aa.ua.' \ "A/oijs 5' OOK ayadCov (pelderat d \ \ a KO.KWV, Aesch. fr. 100 dXX' "Apijs ipiXet | dei 7-d X<jj
fr- 5542 Valckenaer proposed Avaipiiv, but this is another instance (see cr. n.) of the confusion of iv with oiv, for which see on fr. 679;_ 3 aTas. For the plural of the abstract noun used distributively see Gildersleeve, § 45.—For T
—no doubt with a mind to Aesch. Prom. 279 Serrts TT7]fiaTu>v £|w irbSa 2xet> Eur. Hipp. X€u-

1293 ir^i/xaTos &J« TrbSa TODS' diriT h e words £KT6S ei
are intended to recall the proverb ££vos riptvov <JT6.%VV I rb\fj.as atpaipjj Kairohwri^Tj

vtovs. Blass in Rh. Mus. LXII 272 suggested that the lines might have been spoken by Priam to Paris with reference to the death of Hector. Welcker assumed that they were addressed to Achilles.

725 ov \ij£eT, ov TTavcreo-6e rovoSe TOVS avvfievaiovvres ; 725 &

Phot. ed. Reitz. p. 151, 7 2 0 X J 1

P ^ t

oi

Reitzenstein conjectured that the speaker was Cassandra, and that she was alluding to the ceremonies connected

Skutsch in Pauly-Wissowa v 2593

4>PYrEI—XPYIHI with the marriage of Paris and Helen. Blass, however, who held that the play related to a much later period in the story (see on fr. 724), assigned the fragment to a messenger who announced the death of Achilles by the hands of Paris and Deiphobus. He supposed accordingly that the wedding was that of Achilles and Polyxena, referring to Hygin. fab. n o . According to some authorities, a meeting was arranged between Priam and Achilles to take place in the grove of the Thymbraean Apollo for the negotiation of the marriage; and on that occasion Achilles was waylaid

327

(Escher in Pauly-Wissowa 1 239). Blass treated the metre as trochaic tetrameter, but the absence of the caesura at the end of the second dipody (Jebb on Phil. 1402) is a fatal objection to this view, as has been pointed out by Mekler (Bursians Jahresb. CXLVII 114). The latter prefers to suppose that the syllable -at- is shortened in dv\>|jievaiovvTcs, for which see on fr. 956, 3. It is perhaps better to assume that a word (e.g. ifSah) has dropped out between ya/iovs and ivvp-evmouvTes. The verb avv^evaiovv is otherwise unknown, but may be compared with a.vv/M'etv, dvevT]fAe?i*, dvafioav, dvaxopetieiv, etc.

XPYIHI Naeke {Opusc. I p. 91) was the first who perceived that the plot of this play was to be found in Hygin. fab. 120, 121. After relating the story of Orestes and Iphigenia according to the version of Euripides in his Iphigenia in Tauris, the mythographer adds (at the end of fab. 120) that Iphigenia succeeded in carrying off the image, and, setting sail with Orestes and Pylades, was borne by a favourable wind to the island Sminthe, the home of Chryses, priest of Apollo. The title Sminthius (Smintheus) was especially connected with the worship of Apollo at Chrysa, a town in the Troad (see on frs. 40, 384); but Strabo (605) declared that it was to be found at several other places in the west of Asia Minor, and in the islands off the coast. Whether by ' the island Sminthe' is meant the island Chryse to the east of Lemnos1, and whether in any case the name is taken from Sophocles we cannot tell. After referring to the events connected with Chryses and Chryseis, as related in the first book of the Iliad, Hyginus {fab. 121) proceeds with the sequel of their history. When Agamemnon restored Chryseis, she was already pregnant, but denied that she was with child by Agamemnon ; and, after the birth of a son to whom also the name of Chryses was given, declared that Apollo was his father. This younger Chryses was grown to manhood at the time when Iphigenia,'pursued by Thoas, arrived at the island. Thoas demanded the surrender of the fugitives, and Chryses was disposed to comply with the request, when his mother Chryseis2, learning that Iphigenia and Orestes were the children of Agamemnon, divulged to 1

Ribbeck thinks that Sminthe represents Tenedos: see on fr. 726. I follow M. Schmidt's text of Hyginus: according to the MS it was the elder Chryses. 2

328

IOOKAEOY£

her son the true story of his birth. Thereupon Chryses assisted his newly-found brother Orestes to kill Thoas, after which the image of Artemis was safely conveyed to Mycenae. Pacuvius also wrote a play with the title Chryses, which Naeke supposed to be an adaptation of Sophocles. He is followed by Welcker, Nauck, and Ribbeck; but Wilamowitz preferred to suppose that Pacuvius made use of a post-Euripidean drama dealing with the story of Iphigenia1. In any case, the fragments of Pacuvius would be but of little assistance for the elucidation of Sophocles' plot; and the question is further complicated by the doubt whether some of the most significant belong to the Chryses or to some other play2. According to a tradition preserved in late authorities3, the name of Chryses was connected with the foundation of Chrysopolis on the Bithynian coast of the Bosporus opposite to Byzantium. After the death of Agamemnon Chryses fled from the machinations of Clytaemnestra, and went in search of Iphigenia; but died at the place afterwards known as Chrysopolis, where he was buried. Wilamowitz4 believes that this legend was adopted by Sophocles, and denies that the story recorded by Hyginus can have been employed in the play. His reason is to be found in the conviction that the plot of" the Iphigenia in Tauris was invented by Euripides, and cannot therefore have been known to Sophocles at the time of the production of the Chryses (before 414 B.C.5). It is a remarkable fact that two, if not three6, of the five extant fragments appear to be comic in intention. This strongly favours the inference that the Chryses was a satyr-play, and the story of Hyginus was obviously capable of comic treatment. On the other hand, not only did Pacuvius adapt Sophocles elsewhere, but no other play than the Chryses is known which could have served as the model of the Pacuvian tragedy. O. Rossbach7 referred to this play a mutilated papyrus fragment published by Grenfell and Hunt in New Class. Fragments II (Oxford, 1897), p. 3, which he restored as -^revBrj Se <E>oi/3o? rjyayev ere i^avrea,—an address of Agamemnon to Calchas (Horn. A 106). This is a very remote possibility. 1

Herm. x v n i 257. Tr. Rom. Frag.3 p. 143 ff.; see also Reid on Cic. Lael. 24. Ribbeck claims for the Chryses, in preference to the Dulorestes, the famous scene in which Orestes and Pylades disputed over their identity, in order that each might save the other from imminent death. The conclusion is supported by Non. s.v. opino (Pacuv. roi R.). 3 Hesychius of Miletus (6th cent. A.D.) : see FHG IV 148. Cf. Etym. M. P- 815, 55. 4 5 6 I.e. 256. Fr. 727. Frs. 728, 729, and 726. 7 Berl. ph. Wochenschr. 1899, 1630 ff. 3

XPYIHZ

329

726 Trpcppa. \oLJ3rjs 'Ecrrux, 7 2 6 Schol. V Ar. Vesp. 846 TT, yap 11. 56 tiffrepov r/yavaKTOvv i-jrl TO?S ireUTIIJ ras awapxas Idos T)V 7rotet' 'EffTtas KOiMeiv). See further Gruppe, Gr. Myth., p. 14054, Siiss in Pauly-Wissowa v m 1272 ff.— (with &TTI for'E, K\V8WV, KCLT^xeiv, vtpeifjievos, otfptos libation, was made to Hestia : Plat. Crat. 401 D TO irpb T&VTWV deC>v rrj 'Harta irpwrrj etc.). Cf. Aesch. Suppl. 1000 iv irpiijivrj wpod-ueiv. There is good authority for the tppevSs, Ag. 245 (rrdfUiTOS KaWiirpitipov. In E u r . Tro. 103 /xijde irpoaloTfa irpi^pav statement that she was also honoured last, /3t6rou I 7rpos /cu/xa ir\4ov' ijs ye younger Chryses on learning the truth. Cib
727 Wy

Zrjvbs i£avafj

T27 Schol. Ar. Av. 1240 TOUTO p points to the demolition of buildings : vrapa rb 2o06/cXetoc ev Xpucrrj (so Fritzsche cf. Aesch. Pers. 813 8ai.fi.6puv ff' Idpiion Ar. Thesm. 300 : XPvaV codd.) ' j i X X /xara | irpopptfa ipijpdrjv ££av4aTpairTai fiddpoiv.—I have followed Nauck in accept^avaffrpafp^' pp^ ing Fritzsche's h Xpiiay. Dindorf (fr. The words of Aristophanes (6Vus /«; va Dut it is 259, Apoll. Rhod. 4. 1533. But the verb

Z04>0KAE0YI XPYIHZ

33O

728 TOIOVTOS

(OV

dpgetc

vSe Tov

TOV

7 2 8 fipfeie cod. 9 : apl-u RV, fipfeis Aid., &p%eis V Guiixdruv Xa/i- reference was to the promise of Helen to Paris, and he was followed by Ellendt. (idveadai 7ro\\<£/«s, Kal irapa rip So0o/cXer Welcker and Ribbeck assigned the speech iv XpiV## ' TOIOUTOS.. .Kpitas.' p to a barbarian, Welcker to Chryses and TOV Kpe'ios is generally assumed Ribbeck to Thoas ; but barbarians do not on the authority of Aristarchus to be a periphrasis for the pronoun i/xov (or pos- speak so, unless they are represented as comic characters. The parallel instances sibly eKeivov). The only extant parallels of cra.pt; quoted by Welcker, and the periare Ar. Eq. 421 w SefyiiiTarov Kpiat, and ib. 457 & -yevvi.KthTa.Tov Kpias. Observe phrastic use of (ru/ia, difias, and Kapa referred to by Blaydes do not solve the however that the words may have borne a stronger meaning ' master of this my difficulty.—In favour of Brunck's ap%eis 06, which he would make interrogative, flesh.' But in neither case is it credible that icpias would have been usedj if the Blaydes quotes Ar. Eq. 1307 ov STJT' i/iov 7' dp^et TTOT\ JLys. 63J d \ V efiov fiev ov quotation was taken from a tragedy. Outside the Cyclops, Kpias is only applied Tvpavveiio-ovo-', E u r . Her. 258 dXX' oiiK ifj.ou (TV de
729 fjbiav 729

(JLCV

i£iovdi£a)

7 2 9 filav p.iv] piXaivav Lehrs | rpixa Hesych.: Tplxas Apollon. Apollon. lex. Horn. p. 91, 34 surface': cf. Phryn. praep. Soph. p. 77,

iov$ddos...ras

yap rGiv rptx&v pl^as Ibvdovs

17 de B . tovffos' i) iirl TOC irpoo-iinrov iifia rrj TGIV Tpix&v iK
H e s y c h . II p . 126 ^icwflifw [VfioxSifu] Tptxa' eKSLSwiu. tan. yap lovBos pi fa

ntvi) dS-qais. If |Uav is right, there is reason to doubt whether the tone is serious, and this might bear on the interpretation of fr. 728. Otherwise, there is much to be said for Lehrs's piXcuvav. Wagner's fila /xev is unintelligible. Bergk (PLG III 711) retains rplxas with fiiav ixiv, interpreting the latter as ' one by one' like niav fiiav fr. 201. But is probably a mere blunder.

The meaning of f£u>v8i[« is hardly doubtful: it denotes the first sprouting of the beard on the chin. Cf. Suid. iovBoS ' T] Tp&TTj (:K<j>VO~lS TWV TpiX&V, o\irb

TOU Uvat Kal avdeiv. Etym. M. p. 473, 17. Schol. Horn. I 50 fovBoi Si ^{axflijfiara aKy.a£ovTos (ribfj.aros. TO virepixov

in Hesych. is ' that which rises from the

730 73O

Ammon. ed. Valck. p. 34 vapa

KXTJS Si Kal avrl ^u/iou olStv

i&xapav.

The distinction between /3w/t6?> and £• iv nXucrffivei (fr. 628) ' i*TiXo
X/HVJ;.

Eustath. Od. p. 1564, 32 So0o-

The Fragments of Sophocles, Volume 3 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

The Fragments of Sophocles, Volume 1 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

The Republic of Plato, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

A History of Greece (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics) (Volume 2)

Read more

A History of Greece, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Adversaria, Volume 1 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Sophocles: The Plays and Fragments, Volume 2: With Critical Notes, Commentary and Translation in English Prose (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Epicurea (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Aristotle: Rhetoric, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

P. Vergili Maronis Opera, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Aristoteles und Athen, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Annals of Cambridge (Cambridge Library Collection - Cambridge) (Volume 2)

Read more

The Republic of Plato, Volume 1 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

The History of Rome, Volume 1 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

The Cambridge Portfolio, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Cambridge)

Read more

Journal, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - History)

Read more

The History of Rome, Volume 3 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Sophocles: The Plays and Fragments, Volume 6: With Critical Notes, Commentary and Translation in English Prose (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Sophocles: The Plays and Fragments, Volume 1: With Critical Notes, Commentary and Translation in English Prose (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Sophocles: The Plays and Fragments, Volume 3: With Critical Notes, Commentary and Translation in English Prose (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Sophocles: The Plays and Fragments, Volume 5: With Critical Notes, Commentary and Translation in English Prose (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Sophocles: The Plays and Fragments, Volume 4: With Critical Notes, Commentary and Translation in English Prose (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

A History of Greece, Volume 7 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

The Cambridge Shakespeare (Cambridge Library Collection - Literary Studies) (Volume 2)

Read more

A History of Greece, Volume 10 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

A History of Greece (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics) (Volume 5)

Read more

A History of Greece (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics) (Volume 4)

Read more

A History of Greece, Volume 3 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

A History of Greece, Volume 8 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

A History of Greece, Volume 6 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Read more

Recommend Documents

The Fragments of Sophocles, Volume 3 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Cambridge Library CoLLeCtion Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...

The Fragments of Sophocles, Volume 1 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Cambridge Library CoLLeCtion Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...

The Republic of Plato, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Cambridge Library CoLLeCtion Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...

A History of Greece (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics) (Volume 2)

C a m b r i d g e L i b r a r y C o ll e c t i o n Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to ...

A History of Greece, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Cambridge Library CoLLeCtion Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...

Adversaria, Volume 1 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Cambridge Library CoLLeCtion Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...

Sophocles: The Plays and Fragments, Volume 2: With Critical Notes, Commentary and Translation in English Prose (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Cambridge Library CoLLeCtion Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...

Epicurea (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Cambridge Library CoLLeCtion Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...

Aristotle: Rhetoric, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Cambridge Library CoLLeCtion Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...

P. Vergili Maronis Opera, Volume 2 (Cambridge Library Collection - Classics)

Cambridge Library CoLLeCtion Books of enduring scholarly value Classics From the Renaissance to the nineteenth century...